Skip to main content
· 1/15/1913

Wolkowsky v. Garfunkel

Citations

  • 65 Fla. 10
  • 60 So. 791

Syllabus

<p>In an action on the case the plaintiff is entitled to substantial damages for the wrong done him in his business repute when it is shown that the defendant in a rather exultant manner falsely stated to different persons that the plaintiff a merchant had failed in business and that defendant had seen the bankrupt papers in the court, it appearing that the plaintiff was injured in his business as a consequence of such false statements. In this case a judgment for $5000.00 damages is not so large in amount as to call for interference by the appellate court.</p>

How courts have described this case

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

  • issue for the trial court is whether “the report” represents a good-faith effort to comply with the statutory definition of an expert report in TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 74.351 (West 2011)
  • verdict for attempted trafficking in a controlled substance supported, in part, by evidence that defendant approached vehicle and inquired as to what the occupant wanted, then went into a nearby building and, upon his return, discussed the size of a drug purchase
  • verdict for attempted trafficking in a controlled substance supported, in part, by evidence that defendant approached vehicle and inquired as to what the occupant wanted, then went into a nearby building and, upon his return, discussed the size of a drug purchase

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cockrell, Hockkr, Shackleford, Taylor, Whitfield

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.