Estes v. Sterchi Bros. Stores, Inc.

• Decision Date: 20 February 1935
• Docket Number: 24152.
• Citation: 179 S.E. 222,50 Ga.App. 619
• Parties: ESTES v. STERCHI BROS. STORES, Inc., et al.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

179 S.E. 222

50 Ga.App. 619

ESTES v. STERCHI BROS. STORES, Inc., et al.

No. 24152.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Second Division

February 20, 1935

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Words which are plain and do not impute crime cannot, by innuendo have their meaning enlarged to impute crime.

Letter to plaintiff's employer reciting that plaintiff owed money and persisted in "retaining the money that is due," in spite of writer's many appeals for "payment," did not impute larceny or embezzlement to plaintiff and could not, by innuendo, have its meaning enlarged to impute crime.

Written statement that one not engaged in vocation requiring credit fails and refuses to pay debt, made to alleged debtor's employer solely for purpose of urging employer to induce alleged debtor to pay debt held not "libelous per se," so as to render author of statement liable without proof of special damage.

Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; John D. Humphries, Judge.

Petition by E. G. Estes against the Sterchi Brothers Stores Incorporated, and others. To review a judgment sustaining a general demurrer to the petition, plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

Morris Macks, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

Clifford Hendrix and Hendrix & Buchanan, all of Atlanta, for defendants in error.

Syllabus OPINION.

STEPHENS Judge.

1. Words which are plain and unambiguous and do not impute a crime cannot, by innuendo, have their meaning enlarged and extended so as to impute a crime. Morris v. Evans, 22 Ga.App. 11, 95 S.E. 385. A writing which recites that a person owes a sum of money and "persists in retaining the money that is due" the writer, "in spite of" the writer's many appeals for "payment," and which is transmitted to the employer of the alleged debtor, and which states that other employers have requested the writer to notify them before filing garnishments against their employees, as they are often able to persuade their employees to settle with the writer, in plain and unambiguous language charges the person about whom the words were uttered only with owing a debt, and does not by the expression "retaining the money that is due" the writer, impute the crime of larceny or embezzlement of funds belonging to the writer of the letter, and therefore does not impute a crime, and cannot, by innuendo, have its meaning enlarged and extended as imputing a crime.

2. A mere written statement that a person who is not engaged...