Ryckman v. Parkins

9 Wend. 470
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1833·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Savage, Ch. J.

The slander in this case was of a wanton and wicked character, imputing to the plaintiff a crime of the most atrocious nature; and when the great wealth of the defendant is taken into consideration, there is nothing in the case to induce the suspicion of prejudice, partiality or corruption on the part of the jury in finding a verdict against the defendant to the amount of $7000. In McConnell v. Hampton, 12 Johns. R. 234, where a verdict for $9000 was rendered in favor of the plaintiff in an action of false imprisonment, the court ordered a new trial; but in that case there were mitigating circumstances ; here there are none. The order to stay proceedings is therefore vacated, and the plaintiff is at liberty to enter judgment upon the verdict, notwithstanding the case made.

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

Ryckman v. Parkins, 9 Wend. 470 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1833).

9 Wend. 470 (Ryckman v. Parkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gibson v. Cincinnati Enquirer
10 F. Cas. 311 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Ohio, 1877)
Shaw v. Boston & Worcester Railroad
74 Mass. 45 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1857)
Woodruff v. Fisher
17 Barb. 224 (New York Supreme Court, 1853)
Coffin v. Coffin
4 Mass. 1 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1808)
Brett v. Hood
1 Cai. Cas. 343 (New York Supreme Court, 1803)