Skip to main content
· 10/7/1889

Hayes v. Press Co.

Citations

  • 127 Pa. 642
  • 18 A. 331
  • 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1154

Syllabus

<p>1. Written or printed words which are injurious to a person in his office, profession, or calling, or which impeach the credit of a merchant or trader, by imputing to him insolvency, or even embarrassment, are libelous.</p> <p>2. The office of an innuendo is to aver the meaning of the language published, but if the common understanding takes hold of the words, and at once, without difficulty or doubt, applies a libelous meaning to them, an innuendo is unnecessary.</p> <p>3. The publication by a newspaper, under the heading, “Hotel Proprietors Embarrassed,” that a judgment had been entered against the proprietors of a hotel for an amount due on a note payable on demand, was not privileged, but libelous and actionable.</p> <p>4. In such case, it was error to admit evidence that a notice of the entry of the judgment had been made in other newspapers, and to refuse to charge that the publication complained of was actionable on its face, that it was not privileged, and that malice might be inferred.</p>

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating “the Board’s imposition of backtime is not a sentence on the parole violation nor analogous to a sentence”
  • distinguishing between “backtime” and a “sentence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Clark, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Stereett, Sterrett, Williams

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.