State ex rel. Bruns v. Clausmier

• Decision Date: 29 May 1900
• Citation: 154 Ind. 599,57 N.E. 541
• Parties: STATE ex rel. BRUNS v. CLAUSMIER et al.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

154 Ind. 599

57 N.E. 541

STATE ex rel.

BRUNS

v.CLAUSMIER et al.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

May 29, 1900.

Appeal from circuit court, Allen county; E. O'Rourke, Judge.

Action by the state, on the relation of John W. Bruns, against Edward F. Clausmier and others. From a judgment in favor of defendants, rendered on a demurrer to plaintiff's complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Ninde & Sons and C. Holden, for appellant. Morris, Barrett & Morris, for appellee.

MONKS, J.

This action was brought by the relator against appellee Clausmier, on his official bond as sheriff, and the other appellees, sureties on said bond, to recover damages for an alleged breach thereof. A demurrer for want of facts was sustained to the complaint, and, the relator refusing to plead further, judgment was rendered in favor of appellees.

It is alleged in the complaint that while the relator was confined in the jail of Allen county, and in the custody of said Clausmier, as sheriff, on a charge of forgery, said Clausmier, on the 13th day of November, 1896, “without the consent and against the wish of said relator, compelled him, by force of commands, and threatening physical compulsion, to come forth out of his cell in said jail, into the office of said jail, and then and there, intentionally, wrongfully, unlawfully, and maliciously, took the picture of said relator, and on the same day, without the consent and against the wish and notwithstanding the protest of relator, said Clausmier weighed and measured said relator, and by observation of the body of said relator, and by inquiry of him, and by means of records, obtained a personal description of relator”; that on said 15th day of November, 1896, and thereafter, said Clausmier, “maliciously intending to ruin the relator's fair name and reputation, and to bring said relator into public infamy, disgrace, and scandal, by holding said relator up to scorn, ridicule, contempt, and execration, and to impair his enjoyment of general society by imputing and implying that said relator had committed a crime and was a rogue and a criminal, by associating the picture of the relator with the pictures of criminals, and representing the said relator as a criminal and as a person whom the police should watch, and whom the officers of the law generally should observe and watch more critically than said officers and said police do mankind generally who are not known as criminals, by placing the picture of said relator on cards which are used for mounting the pictures of criminals, and using said pictures for the express and sole purpose of holding said relator forth as a criminal, on said day did maliciously and falsely make and publish of and concerning the relator the following false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory words, and picture of said relator in connection therewith [the description of the relator, and the charge against him, and by whom he was arrested, as shown on the back of said picture, are set forth in the complaint]; that the pictures of persons, taken and mounted as aforesaid on cards of that style, with the words and combination of words printed and written thereon, as a whole, when exhibited and used as these were, have a definite and well-known meaning, that said persons are criminals and rogues, and that said pictures and words make what are well and popularly known as the ‘Rogues' Gallery’; that said Clausmier, before the relator had any opportunity to prove his innocence of the charge for which he was committed, wrongfully, unlawfully, and maliciously caused large numbers of the picture of said relator, and said words and combination of words on the reverse side thereof, to be sent and placed in the police department of the city of Ft. Wayne, and to divers persons to the relator unknown, and has widely published the libel here complained of; that said...