Flamingham v. Boucher

Ohio Supreme Court

Flamingham v. Boucher

1 Wright 746, 1 Ohio Ch. 746

DecidedNovember 15, 1834

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 746 (Flamingham v. Boucher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Flamingham v. Boucher, 1 Wright 746, 1 Ohio Ch. 746 (Ohio 1834).

Pincite

Opinion

COLLETT, C. J.

tto the jiua-y: If the evidence' satisfies you- the-words, were spoken- within a. year before the date of the writ, the plaintiff wi'1'1. have a right to recover;: but in determining that question, under the pleadings, you- should lay out of view all words spoken-more, than a year before the writ. But if the words are proven to have been- spoken within the year, and the plaintiff’s right is thus established, you may then-take info.-view words spoken more-than a year, to show the degree of malice which influenced the slanderer and to aggravate the damages.

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

COLLETT, C. J.

tto the jiua-y: If the evidence' satisfies you- the-words, were spoken- within a. year before the date of the writ, the plaintiff wi'1'1. have a right to recover;: but in determining that question, under the pleadings, you- should lay out of view all words spoken-more, than a year before the writ. But if the words are proven to have been- spoken within the year, and the plaintiff’s right is thus established, you may then-take info.-view words spoken more-than a year, to show the degree of malice which influenced the slanderer and to aggravate the damages.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wright 746, 1 Ohio Ch. 746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flamingham-v-boucher-ohio-1834.