Barker v. Barker's adm'r

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• criticizing Davis, yet noting change in common law should be made by legislature, not court
• listing the categories of per se defamatory statements, which include “defamatory words, falsely spoken of a party which prejudice such party in his or her profession or trade.”
• discussing how “Slander of Women Act” changed common law in England
• setting out the four categories of spoken words that are actionable per se: (1) defamatory “words that impute a charge” that will subject the party to indictment for a crime involving moral turpitude; (2
• setting out the four categories of spoken words that are actionable per se: (1) defamatory “words that impute a charge” that will subject the party to indictment for a crime involving moral turpitude; (2) defamatory words that impute that a party is infected with a contagious disease; (3
• discussing classes of spoken words that are actionable per se

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).