Clark v. North American Co.

Citations

• 203 Pa. 346
• 53 A. 237
• 1902 Pa. LEXIS 726

Syllabus

<p>Libel — Variance in name — Description of person — Charge.</p> <p>If a libel is so worded that it may naturally or probably be taken to refer to the plaintiff it is actionable by him though he is not named or even is called by a different name.</p> <p>In an action for libel against a newspaper by one James Clark, where the article, admitted to be false and libelous per se, refers to one John Clark who is described by plaintiff’s occupation, official position, locality, etc., the court should call the jury’s attention to the fact that the name used in the article did not refer to the plaintiff, but to one John Clark, a different person, but that on the other hand, the description pointed directly to the plaintiff, and the jury should consider the whole article and determine from all the evidence whether, notwithstanding the difference of name, the description was such, either intentionally or by want ot due care anti diligence in ascertaining the true facts, that there would be a natural and reasonable inference that the plaintiff was the person referred to, and if there would be, that the defendant is liable.</p> <p>Libel — Evidence— Irrelevant mailer.</p> <p>In an action for libel, questions which tend to elicit the fact that plaintiff’s brother is being sought for by the police, are irrelevant and inadmissible, inasmuch as they have no bearing on the case, except to prejudice the jury against the plaintiff.</p> <p>Libel — Other publications — Evidence.</p> <p>In an action against a newspaper for libel, accounts of the same transaction in other newspapers are not admissible in evidence for any purpose.</p> <p>Evidence — Reputation—Rebuttal—Attach on reputation by cross-examination.</p> <p>A plaintiff in a libel case is entitled to give evidence of his good character or reputation after the defendant has attacked it, and it is immaterial whether the attack has been by direct evidence on the subject, or by slurs and insinuations thrown into the jury box by abuse o