Harter v. Whitebread

Citations

• 38 Pa. Super. 10
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 84

Syllabus

<p>Slander — Substance of charge — Variance—Evidence.</p> <p>1. In an action for slander the law deals with the substance of the injurious charge, rather than with the form or letter of it. Ordinarily so long as the variance between the language of the statement, and that admitted by the defendant, is not of substance, the defendant cannot be injured.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Trial—Charge—Exception.</p> <p>2. Where a trial judge uses language in his charge relating to testimony which is capable of being misunderstood by the jury, exception should be taken to it at the time. The fact that no special exception was taken at the time serves to indicate that the language was not misunderstood.</p> <p>Evidence — Witness—Contradiction of statement.</p> <p>3. Where a witness is called for the sole purpose of contradicting a statement imputed to him by the plaintiff in his testimony, he cannot be examined as to his entire conversation with the plaintiff. For this purpose he should be called in chief.</p> <p>Slander — Damages—Financial standing of defendant.</p> <p>4. Where in an action for slander the plaintiff has made no effort to swell her damages by showing that the defendant was rich, the latter cannot show his financial standing in mitigation of damages.</p>