(DOWNLOAD) "Woolston v. Montana Free Press Et Al." by Supreme Court of Montana # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Woolston v. Montana Free Press Et Al.
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 14, 1931
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 69 KB
Description
Libel ? Newspaper Article ? Insufficiency to Constitute Libel Per Se. Libel ? Newspapers ? When Objectionable Article Libelous Per Se. 1. The words used in an alleged libelous newspaper article must be susceptible of but one meaning to constitute libel per se; the libelous matter may not be segregated from other parts and construed alone, but the entire statement must be viewed by the court as a stranger might look at it, without the aid of special knowledge possessed by the parties concerned. Same ? When Complained of Printed Article not Libelous Per Se. 2. Where a printed article requires an innuendo or explanation, the language used may not be held libelous per se. Same ? Case at Bar ? Article Held not Libelous Per Se. 3. While it is the law that to assert a suspicion, belief or opinion, is as effectively a libel as though the charge were positively made, a statement in a printed article that an effort had been made to secure the mailing list of a newspaper "in an unethical and underhand manner" and that the surrounding circumstances seemed to - Page 300 warrant the conclusion that the "advertising man" (meaning plaintiff) of another paper was behind the effort, held not libelous per se, in the absence of a further statement, as to the conduct of the person or persons who made the attempt, or the extent of the responsibility of plaintiff for the effort in the way it was made. Same ? What Insufficient to Constitute Libel. 4. A newspaper article relating to acts and conduct of an employee of a rival paper said to have been done and indulged in in an effort to injure the former, examined and held not libelous per se, in the absence of innuendo or explanation, nor sufficient to show that it injured plaintiff in his business or profession, exposed him to hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, or caused him to be shunned or avoided (sec. 5690, Rev. Codes 1921), and demurrer to the complaint should have been sustained.