TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Speaker v. McKenzie

Speaker, in Errror v. McKenzie, in Error

Speaker v. McKenzie, 26 Mo. 255 (1858)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Missouri · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 15, 1858
Judges
Richardson
Citations
26 Mo. 255
Headnotes
1. Words charging that a man had whipped his mother are not actionable in themselves; special damage must be alleged.
Summary
Error to Livingston Circuit Court. This was an action for slanderous words. The words charged, leaving out the innuendoes, are as follows: “He whipped his mother“ he whipped his mother and-told me so “ one Mr.-told me that he had whipped his mother and left.” The court sustained a demurrer to the petition. The words charged are actionable. The gravamen in an action of slander is social degradation. The words in this case charge such a criminal violation of filial obligations and duties as necessarily involves social degradation. The phrase “ assault and battery” includes the various grades of that offence, and is punishable according to the grade by fine, or by both fine and imprisonment in the county jail or in the penitentiary. Simple assault and battery is punishable by imprisonment if the fine is not paid. Plaintiff was charged with having committed the crime in the state of Ohio and fled therefrom in consequence of it. At the common law, assault and battery was an indictable offence and punishable by fine and imprisonment, and in some cases by ignominious penalties, such as pillory. (2 Black. 166.) The common law will, in the absence of proof, be presumed to be the law of Ohio. (Baker v. Pierce, 6 Mod. 24; 1 Bulst. 40 ; Stark, on Slander, 15, 26 ; Onslow v. Horne, 3 Wills. 177 ; Holt v. Shaffield, 6 T. R. 691.) Words which charge or import a crime punishable by law, whatever may be the nature or degree of the crime, are actionable in themselves. (1 Swift, 484; see also Woodbury v. Thompson, 3 N. H. 194; 14 Johns. 233.)

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Richardson

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Richardson, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit for slander, and the words alleged to have been spoken are- that the plaintiff had whipped his mother. This charge imputed only an assault and battery, and the words laid in the petition are not actionable without the averment of special damage. (Birch v. Benton, 26 Mo. 153 .) The demurrer to the petition was properly sustained; and the other judges concurring, the judgment will be affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1906: 11910: 21922: 11980: 119062026peak 1910 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Cook v. Globe Printing Co.127 S.W. 332 (Mo. 1910) · Dissent
  2. Earley v. Winn109 N.W. 633 (Wis. 1906)
  3. Starobin v. Northridge Lakes Development Co.287 N.W.2d 747 (Wis. 1980)
  4. Sipp v. Coleman179 F. 997 (1910)
  5. Caffey v. Moffatt246 S.W. 51 (Mo. Ct. App. 1922)

Most recent

  1. Starobin v. Northridge Lakes Development Co.287 N.W.2d 747 (Wis. 1980)
  2. Caffey v. Moffatt246 S.W. 51 (Mo. Ct. App. 1922)
  3. Sipp v. Coleman179 F. 997 (1910)
  4. Cook v. Globe Printing Co.127 S.W. 332 (Mo. 1910) · Dissent
  5. Earley v. Winn109 N.W. 633 (Wis. 1906)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Birch v. Benton, 26 Mo. 153 (1858) 33

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list