Carver v. Greason

Citations

• 104 Kan. 96
• 177 P. 539
• 1919 Kan. LEXIS 193

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Libel — Public Officer — Misconduct in Office — Conditionally PHvileged Communication. An article printed in a newspaper, which has relation wholly to the official conduct of a public officer, and does not reflect upon his private character nor assail the integrity of his motives, is conditionally privileged, and will not support an action on his part for libel, notwithstanding it may not be true, if it was published in good faith — without actual malice.</p> <p>2. Same — Public Officer — Express Malice Must be Shown. To prevail in an action brought under such circumstances the plaintiff is required to plead and prove express malice. Malice is not presumed from the false and injurious character of the publication, although it may be inferred from the language used, if it is of a disproportionate, exaggerated, and sensational character. Otherwise it must be made to appear by extrinsic evidence.</p> <p>3. Same — Actual Malice — Question for the Court. Whether the language used in a particular case on its face constitutes evidence of actual malice is a question of law to be determined by the court.</p> <p>4. Same — Newspaper Article — Does Not Show Malice on its Face. An article in a newspaper alleging that a county attorney, before recommending the parole of a defendant who had pleaded guilty to a felony, had not made a vigilant investigation of his record or he would have discovered that he had previously been an inmate of a penitentiary, held not to show malice on its face, although the cónduct'of -the' officer in that regard was characterized in somewhat offensive language.</p> <p>5. Same. The extrinsic evidence held not to show actual malice.</p>