Singer Mfg. Co. v. Taylor
| Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
| Writing for the Court | TYSON, C.J. |
| Citation | 43 So. 210,150 Ala. 574 |
| Parties | SINGER MFG. CO. ET AL. v. TAYLOR. |
| Decision Date | 19 December 1906 |
43 So. 210
150 Ala. 574
SINGER MFG. CO. ET AL.
v.
TAYLOR.
Supreme Court of Alabama
December 19, 1906
Rehearing Denied March 2, 1907.
Appeal from City Court of Birmingham; C. W. Ferguson, Judge.
Action by Julia E. Taylor against the Singer Manufacturing Company and another. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed and remanded.
Action for slander, begun by appellee against the Singer Manufacturing Company, a corporation, and Chas. Allen, jointly. There were numerous counts to the complaint, but the cause was tried upon counts 5, 6, 7, and 8. These allege that the plaintiff had occasion to go to the office of the agent of the corporation who had charge of the business of the corporation, to wit, Allen, and who, acting in the line and scope of his employment and within his authority as such agent, said of the plaintiff: "You are a thief. I know you. I cannot be mistaken." Some of the counts allege that in using these words Allen was acting within the line and scope of his authority and employment, and for and on behalf and in the interest and for the benefit of the corporations. Other counts allege, in addition to these averments, that Allen's acts and sayings were ratified by the corporation, and that the corporation approved these words. Demurrers were interposed, raising the question of a misjoinder of parties defendant, and of the inability to require the corporation to answer for the acts of its agent in this character of suit, and other questions not considered in the opinion of the court. These questions were all presented by objections to testimony on the part of the corporation, and presented by refused charges requested by each defendant in writing. Issue was joined upon the general issue and the statute of limitations of one year. There was verdict and judgment for plaintiff against both defendants.
Ward & Drennen, for appellants.
B. M. Allen, for appellee.
TYSON, C.J.
This action was brought against a corporation and its agent for slander. It is alleged in the complaint that the agent, "while acting as agent for the defendant company and in line of his duty as such agent, falsely and maliciously charged the plaintiff with larceny, by speaking of and concerning her, in the presence of divers persons: 'You are a thief. I know you.' " "The current of authority now is that corporations are responsible civilly, the same as natural persons, for wrongs committed by their officers or agents in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Penas v. Chi., M. & St. P. Ry. Co.
...law ‘of protecting each passenger from avoidable discomfort, from insults, disputes, and personal violence.’ Singer Mfg. Co. v. Taylor, 150 Ala. 574,43 South. 210,9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 929, 124 Am. St. Rep. 90;Birmingham Co. v. Baird, 130 Ala. 334,30 South. 456,54 L. R. A. 752, 89 Am. St. Rep.......
-
Penas v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., Nos. 16,409-(153).
...common law "of protecting each passenger from avoidable discomfort, from insults, indignities, and personal violence." Singer v. Taylor, 150 Ala. 574, 43 South. 210, 9 L.R.A.(N.S.) 929, 124 Am. St. 90; Birmingham v. Baird, 130 Ala. 334, 30 South. 456, 54 L.R.A. 752, 89 Am. St. 43. Craker v.......
-
Vowles v. Yakish, No. 32668.
...v. Cudahy Pkg. Co., 179 Ala. 404, 60 South. 848;Flaherty v. Maxwell Motor Co., 187 Mich. 62, 153 N. W. 45;Singer Mfg. Co. v. Taylor, 150 Ala. 574, 43 South. 210, 9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 929, 124 Am. St. Rep. 90. The agency of the defendant Yakish to adjust the loss for his codefendant is admitte......
-
Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Carter, 6 Div. 223
...a servant or agent of the corporation in committing an assault and battery and we are thoroughly familiar with Singer Mfg. Co. v. Taylor (150 Ala. 574, 43 So. 9 L.R.A. [N.S.] 929, 124 Am.St.Rep. 90); Republic Iron & Steel Co. v. Self (192 Ala. 403, 68 So. 328, L.R.A.1915F, 516); and C......
-
Penas v. Chi., M. & St. P. Ry. Co.
...law ‘of protecting each passenger from avoidable discomfort, from insults, disputes, and personal violence.’ Singer Mfg. Co. v. Taylor, 150 Ala. 574,43 South. 210,9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 929, 124 Am. St. Rep. 90;Birmingham Co. v. Baird, 130 Ala. 334,30 South. 456,54 L. R. A. 752, 89 Am. St. Rep.......
-
Penas v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., Nos. 16,409-(153).
...common law "of protecting each passenger from avoidable discomfort, from insults, indignities, and personal violence." Singer v. Taylor, 150 Ala. 574, 43 South. 210, 9 L.R.A.(N.S.) 929, 124 Am. St. 90; Birmingham v. Baird, 130 Ala. 334, 30 South. 456, 54 L.R.A. 752, 89 Am. St. 43. Craker v.......
-
Vowles v. Yakish, No. 32668.
...v. Cudahy Pkg. Co., 179 Ala. 404, 60 South. 848;Flaherty v. Maxwell Motor Co., 187 Mich. 62, 153 N. W. 45;Singer Mfg. Co. v. Taylor, 150 Ala. 574, 43 South. 210, 9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 929, 124 Am. St. Rep. 90. The agency of the defendant Yakish to adjust the loss for his codefendant is admitte......
-
Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Carter, 6 Div. 223
...a servant or agent of the corporation in committing an assault and battery and we are thoroughly familiar with Singer Mfg. Co. v. Taylor (150 Ala. 574, 43 So. 9 L.R.A. [N.S.] 929, 124 Am.St.Rep. 90); Republic Iron & Steel Co. v. Self (192 Ala. 403, 68 So. 328, L.R.A.1915F, 516); and C......