October 5, 2012

T. M. & Marshall Wells v. Liberty Lacefield, Rockcastle, 1873

T. M. and Marshall Wells v. Liberty Lacefield.

COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY

7 Ky. Op. 10; 1873 Ky. LEXIS 391

June 17, 1873, Decided

PRIOR HISTORY:   [*1]  APPEAL FROM ROCKCASTLE CIRCUIT COURT. 

DISPOSITION: Judgment affirmed. 

COUNSEL: C. Kirtly, for appellant.

Bradleys, for appellee. 

JUDGES: Judge Pryor. 

OPINION BY: Pryor 

OPINION
Opinion by Judge Pryor:

The demurrer to the petition was properly sustained. The words import no charge that would subject the party to action for slander. The meaning of the words can not be enlarged or changed by an innuendo. Porter v. Hughey, 5 Ky. 232, 2 Bibb 232. The answer filed in this case should be stricken from the record. No greater contempt could be offered a court than the filing of such a pleading. It is unnecessarily vulgar and seems to have been prepared with a view of elucidating not only the individual feeling towards the parties instituting the action but to evince an entire want of respect for the tribunal in which these proceedings were had. It does not appear from the record that those filing it were required to answer for the contempt. We take it for granted, however, that such an indignity was not allowed to pass unnoticed.

The judgment is affirmed.

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...