West v. Hanrahan

• Decision Date: 29 October 1881
• Citation: 28 Minn. 385,10 N.W. 415
• Parties: WEST v HANRAHAN.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

28 Minn. 385

10 N.W. 415

WESTvHANRAHAN.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Filed October 29, 1881.

Appeal from order of district court, county of Pope.

Searle & Story, for respondent.

A. Barto, for appellant.

DICKINSON, J.

This is an action for slander. The complaint charges that the defendant, at a time and place therein named, and in the presence and hearing of a person named, “maliciously spoke of and concerning the plaintiff the false and defamatory words following, to-wit: ‘West [the plaintiff meaning] burned his store, and I know it and will swear to it ;’ and ‘West [the plaintiff meaning] sent two loads of his store goods to the Black Hills, with his mule teams, and started a store there, and then set fire to and burned his store building to get the insurance,”’[meaning thereby that the plaintiff had feloniously set fire to and burned his store in said Pope county.]

The defendant demurred to this complaint on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and from an order overruling such demurrer defendant appealed to this court. In an action of slander, if the words alleged to have been spoken of the plaintiff, when taken in their plainest and most natural sense, and as they would be ordinarily understood, obviously import the commission of crime punishable by indictment, such words are actionable per se. Montgomery v. Deeley, 3 Wis. 623; Case v. Buckley, 15 Wend. 327;St. Martin v. Desnoyer, 1 Minn. 156. Construing the complaint according to this rule, the words alleged to have been spoken, commencing “West [the plaintiff meaning] sent two loads,” etc., impute the doing of an act, which, by the terms of the statute, constitutes an indictable felony, and they are actionable in themselves without other averment. The statute reads as follows, (Gen. St. 1878, c. 95, § 8:) “Whoever wilfully burns any goods, wares, merchandise, or other chattels, or any dwelling-house, hotel, store, or other building, which is at the time insured against loss or damage by fire, with intent to injure the insurer, whether such person is the owner of the properly burned or not, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison not more than 10 years nor less than 3 years.

From the false accusation of such a crime damage is presumed, and hence the words are actionable, without averment of special damages. The defendant claims the pleading insufficient because it does not allege that the plaintiff had a store that was...