Cooper v. Seaverns

Citations

• 81 Kan. 267
• 105 P. 509
• 1909 Kan. LEXIS 356

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Slander — Charge of Unchastity — “Dirty Slut.” According to their usual, popular and natural signification the words “dirty slut,” spoken of a woman, do .not of themselves impute unchastity.</p> <p>:2. -Pleading — Innuendo. In an action for slander based on the words referred to their meaning can not be expanded to include unchastity merely by the innuendo of the petition. If in the light of the occasion and circumstances of their utterance they conveyed such a meaning the extrinsic facts showing they were defamatory should be pleaded in the prefatory part of the petition.</p> <p>:S. -Sufficient Charge of Unchastity. The following words spoken of a married woman — “I suppose that you have heard the slander that’s going about the Coopers; that little girl was born within four or five months after they were married; now what do you think of them?” — fairly mean the woman’s child was begotten out of lawful wedlock and that she had been guilty of a breach of chastity.</p> <p>■4. -f- Allegation and Proof of Special Damages — Common-law Rule. The rule of the common law that spoken words imputing unchastity to a female are not actionable without allegation and proof of special damages took its rise in England from conditions peculiar to that country and is based upon reasons which are not apposite under the legal institutions of this state. It is out of sympathy with the true spirit ■of the bill of rights, lacks the sanction of justice and right, and does not. apply to the conditions or meet the needs of the people of this state.</p> <p>5. Common Law — Statute Continuing it in Force — Limitation. Under the statute of 1868 (Gen. Stat. 1901, §8014), which governs the matter, the common law of England remains in force in this state in aid of the general statutes only so far as it is not modified by constitutional and statutory law, judicial decisions, and the conditions and wants of the people.</p> <p>6. -Modification of Common Law a Judici