Tate v. Nicholson Pub. Co.

Citations

• 122 La. 472
• 47 So. 774
• 1908 La. LEXIS 487

Syllabus

<p>1. Libel and Slandeb (§ 19*) — Wokds Actionable and Liability Thereeob.</p> <p>For the purpose of determining the liability of a newspaper towards plaintiff for the publication of an alleged libel, it is the duty of the court to take into consideration all of the circumstances of the case. It should weigh every fact having a legal bearing on the publication. It should regard the occasion on which it was made to ascertain how far, in view of the occasion and of everything that was said by the defendant with reference to the matters published, the publication is as to its character libelous or not. Its conclusions must be based upon the situation as a whole.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Libel and Slander, Cent. Dig. § 99; Dee. Dig. § 19.*]</p> <p>2. Libel and Slandeb (§ 19*) — Words Actionable and Liability Thebeeob.</p> <p>The headlines to a newspaper article are frequently determinative of the question as to whether the article is libelous or not.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Libel and Slander, Cent. Dig. §§ 98, 99; Dec. Dig. § 19.*]</p> <p>3. Libel and Slander (§ 1*) — 'Words Actionable and Liability Therefor.</p> <p>If a publication in a newspaper does not naturally and reasonably tend to injure plaintiff’s reputation or expose him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, it is not libelous in character.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Libel and Slander, Cent. Dig. § 1; Dec. Dig. § 1.*]</p> <p>4. Libel and Slander (§ 7*) — Words Actionable and Liability Therefor.</p> <p>A publication in a newspaper contained statements made by two persons convicted of crime, to the effect that the jury which had found them guilty of the same had been jobbed (bribed). The remarks were not published with approval, but as statements discredited by the situation of the parties who made them, and as the remarks customarily made by convicted persons in reference to the court and jury which convicts them. The publication as a whole was condemnatory of the con