Skip to main content
· 6/28/1962

Cosgrove Studio & Camera Shop, Inc. v. Pane

Citations

  • 408 Pa. 314
  • 182 A.2d 751
  • 1962 Pa. LEXIS 501

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[A]ny language which unequivocally, maliciously and falsely imputes to an individual or corporation want of integrity in the conduct of his or its business is actionable”
  • defamation action lay when competitor's advertisement accused plaintiff of using unnecessary haste and unskilled workmanship in development of customers' film, resulting in its ruin, and implied plaintiff was dishonest in its business practice by inflating prices
  • defamation action lay when competitor’s advertisement accused plaintiff of using unnecessary haste and unskilled workmanship in development of customers’ film, resulting in its ruin, and implied plaintiff was dishonest in its business practice by inflating prices
  • Under Pennsylvania law, “a defamed party need not be specifically named in a defamatory statement in order to recover, if she is pointed to by description or circumstances tending to identify her.”
  • defamation affecting business interests is actionable
  • adopting Restatement (Second) of Torts, §561

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bell, Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'Beien

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.