Clark v. Hatfield

88 Ill. 440
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1878·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Mr. Justice Sheldon

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This ivas an action for slander, wherein a verdict and judgment Avere rendered for the defendant. •

The only reason urged for a reversal of the judgment is, that the verdict is against the evidence.

The general rule is, that in penal actions, and in actions for a libel or defamation, and other actions vindictive in their nature, a hbav trial will not be granted merely because the verdict is against the Aveight of evidence. Jarvis v. Hathaway, 3 Johns. 180; Rundell v. Butler, 10 Wend. 119; Townshend on Slander, 494-5, 2d ed.

The case before us Aras not one of an aggravated character, and Ave see no cause why the general rule should not be applied.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Clark v. Hatfield, 88 Ill. 440 (Ill. 1878).

88 Ill. 440 (Clark v. Hatfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lupkey v. Weldon
419 S.W.2d 91 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1967)
Sheen v. Peoria Journal Co.
53 Ill. App. 267 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1893)
Chicago West Division Railway Co. v. Ryan
31 Ill. App. 621 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1889)