Valley Dry Goods Co. v. Buford

Citations

• 114 Miss. 414
• 75 So. 252

Syllabus

<p>1. Libel and Slander. Sufficiency of complaint.</p> <p>In an action for slander a declaration alleging that defendant maliciously and unlawfully charged plaintiff with stealing a sum of money out of cash transactions in the store and that she was a liar, thick head and thief, and that defendant published such statements to a designated person was a sufficient allegation upon which to sustain an action for slander.</p> <p>2. Same.</p> <p>In an action for slander it is sufficient to allege the words or synonymous words which constitute the slander.</p> <p>3. Same.</p> <p>Accusing a person of being a thief is actionable per se.</p> <p>4. Libel and Slander. . Pleadings. Variance.</p> <p>There was no material variance between the allegation in a declaration for slander that defendant falsely accused plaintiff of being a thief and so told a designated person, and proof that defendant’s manager told such party that plaintiff had stolen articles, signed a confession, and the case against her was practically settled.</p> <p>5. Libel and Slander. Privileged communications.</p> <p>Defendant’s statement that plaintiff had admitted her part in a theft, is not privileged because made to the brother of another claimed to have participated in the alleged theft.</p> <p>6. Libel and Slander. Instructions. “Uttered.” “Published.”</p> <p>In an action for slander, an instruction, using the word “uttered” instead of “published” was not reversible error since the terms have practically the same legal significance.</p> <p>7. Trial. Misconduct of counsel.</p> <p>On the trial of an action for slander it was not reversible error for counsel for plaintiff to say in his argument to the jury that he believed the plaintiff was a truthful woman, believed every word she said on the witness stand, and believed she was telling the truth.</p> <p>8. Same.</p> <p>It was not reversible error for counsel for plaintiff to comment upon the absence of detectives employed by defendant in the case, where it