Coble v. McDaniel

33 Mo. 363
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedJanuary 15, 1863
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 33 Mo. 363 (Coble v. McDaniel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Coble v. McDaniel, 33 Mo. 363 (Mo. 1863).

Opinion

Bay, Judge,

delivered tlie opinion of the court.

This is an action to recover damages for an alleged slander.

The petition charges that the defendant spoke of and concerning the plaintiff the following words: “ David Coble is a rogue, and he had stole Hoover’s hogs.”

The defendant, in his answer, denies having spoken the words contained in the first count of the petition, and attempts to justify as to the words in the second count.

The petition in this case contains but one co'unt, and the answer must be regarded as both a denial of the words alleged to have been spoken and a justification of those words. Such a defence cannot be made. The defendant must confess the matter stated in the petition and avoid it, or he must traverse it.

Having denied speaking the words, he will be held under the present state of the pleadings to that defence. . The court below, therefore, erred in permitting any evidence to be given upon the subject of justification.

As the cause must be remanded, and the pleadings may be materially changed, it is deemed proper here to state that so much of the testimony given upon the trial as relates to statements made by Elias Boyers, when the defendant was not present, is merely hearsay, and therefore clearly inadmissible.

The other judges concurring,

the judgment will be reversed, and the cause remanded.

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

Related

Brown v. Emerson
134 S.W. 1108 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1911)
Wertheimer-Swarts Shoe Co. v. McDonald
122 S.W. 5 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1909)
State ex inf. Hadley v. Delmar Jockey Club
92 S.W. 185 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1906)
Bank of Monett v. Stone
93 Mo. App. 292 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1902)
McCord v. Doniphan Branch Railway Co.
21 Mo. App. 92 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1886)
Hoskins v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
19 Mo. App. 315 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1885)
Darrett v. Donnelly
38 Mo. 492 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1866)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 Mo. 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coble-v-mcdaniel-mo-1863.