Victor Safe & Lock Co. v. Deright
Citations
- 147 F. 211
- 77 C.C.A. 437
- 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4223
Syllabus
<p>1. Libel — Actionable Words — Special Damage.</p> <p>By the law of libel defamatory language is actionable without special damage when it contains an imputation upon one as an individual, or in respect of his office, profession, or trade, but is not actionable when it is merely in disparagement of one’s property, or of the quality of the articles which he manufactures or sells, unless it occasions special damage^</p> <p>.2. Same.</p> <p>The plaintiff is engaged in the manufacture and sale of what are commonly designated as “Victor Safes.” The defendant, who is engaged in selling other safes, wrote to a third person a letter containing the following language: “We have heard that you had placed order for a Victor Screw Door. We are somewhat surprised at this and feel that you have been misled. The Victor plate safe is very cheaply constructed and can be easily burglarized. The Victor, so-called, “manganese steel safe” is weaker still, and can be opened inside of a vault or anywhere else in a few moments time.” Held, that this language must be regarded as merely in disparagement of the. plaintiff’s safes and therefore as not actionable in the absence of special damage, and that, there being no allegation of such damage in the petition, it is demurrable.</p> <p>(Syllabus by Court.)</p>
Judges: Devanter
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Erick Bowman Remedy Co. v. Jensen Salsbery Laboratories, Inc.Eighth Circuit· 1926-12-27· cited 54×
- Landstrom v. ThorpeEighth Circuit· 1951-05-04· cited 48×
- National Refining Co. v. Benzo Gas Motor Fuel Co.Eighth Circuit· 1927-05-23· cited 46×
- Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. BridwellSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1912-04-29· cited 32×
- Sternberg Mfg. Co. v. Miller, Du Brul & Peters Mfg. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1909-05-08· cited 13×
- International Text-Book Co. v. Leader Printing Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio· 1910-11-05· cited 12×
- Eversharp, Inc. v. Pal Blade Co., Inc.Second Circuit· 1950-06-02· cited 9×
- Dust Sprayer Manufacturing Co. v. Western Fruit GrowerMissouri Court of Appeals· 1907-06-24· cited 2×
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Gott v. PulsiferMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1877-03-07· cited 49×
- Wilson v. DuboisSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1886-07-20· cited 32×
- Dooling v. Budget Publishing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1887-03-23· cited 28×
- Ohio & M. Ry. Co. v. Press Pub. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York· 1891-11-17· cited 14×
- Walker v. Tribune Co.U.S. Circuit Court· 1887-02-14· cited 7×
- McLoughlin v. American Circular Loom Co.First Circuit· 1903-10-06· cited 7×
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.