Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon Volume 24 (Paperback)

,
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1894 edition. Excerpt: ...Jackson County: W. C. HALE, Judge. This appeal is brought to reverse a judgment for five thousand dollars recovered by Emma Cooper in an action 'Norn.--This case is re-reported in 22 L. R. A. 836, with an excellent review of the authorities on the question of the privilege of witnesses as to defamatory testimony. See also Hunclcel v. Voneif, 69 Md. 179 (9 Am. St. Rep. 4l3 ), where the authorities supporting the English view of the privilege of witnesses are collated, discussed, and followed. In Shadden v. McElwee, 86 Tenn. 146 (6 Am. St. Rep. 821), the American rule is followed. The kindred question of libel by defamatory words in a pleading is fully discussed in a note to the Louisiana case of Randall v. Hamilton, 45 La. Ann.; S. C. 22 L. R. A. 649.--REronrns. Argument of counsel. for libel against Calista Phipps and her son, Wm. Phipps. It is charged that in a certain suit for divorce and for the custody of a minor child, pending in the superior court for the county of San Francisco, state of California, between the defendant William Phipps, as plaintiff, and Minnie Phipps, a sister of the plaintiff herein, as defendant, Calista Phipps, one of the defendants herein and mother of her co-defendant Wm. Phipps, was called and testified as a witness, and in response to the following interrogatory of counsel, Has the defendant been in the habit of running around with other men? answered, Yes, sir; two young men came and rented a house and she and her sister meaning this plaintiff, lived with them, and kept house for them; did this about two months; all the neighbors talked about their scandalous conduct; that this testimony was reduced to writing by the court commissioner, and was duly filed, at the instance of...

R397

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles3970
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1894 edition. Excerpt: ...Jackson County: W. C. HALE, Judge. This appeal is brought to reverse a judgment for five thousand dollars recovered by Emma Cooper in an action 'Norn.--This case is re-reported in 22 L. R. A. 836, with an excellent review of the authorities on the question of the privilege of witnesses as to defamatory testimony. See also Hunclcel v. Voneif, 69 Md. 179 (9 Am. St. Rep. 4l3 ), where the authorities supporting the English view of the privilege of witnesses are collated, discussed, and followed. In Shadden v. McElwee, 86 Tenn. 146 (6 Am. St. Rep. 821), the American rule is followed. The kindred question of libel by defamatory words in a pleading is fully discussed in a note to the Louisiana case of Randall v. Hamilton, 45 La. Ann.; S. C. 22 L. R. A. 649.--REronrns. Argument of counsel. for libel against Calista Phipps and her son, Wm. Phipps. It is charged that in a certain suit for divorce and for the custody of a minor child, pending in the superior court for the county of San Francisco, state of California, between the defendant William Phipps, as plaintiff, and Minnie Phipps, a sister of the plaintiff herein, as defendant, Calista Phipps, one of the defendants herein and mother of her co-defendant Wm. Phipps, was called and testified as a witness, and in response to the following interrogatory of counsel, Has the defendant been in the habit of running around with other men? answered, Yes, sir; two young men came and rented a house and she and her sister meaning this plaintiff, lived with them, and kept house for them; did this about two months; all the neighbors talked about their scandalous conduct; that this testimony was reduced to writing by the court commissioner, and was duly filed, at the instance of...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

Rarebooksclub.com

Country of origin

United States

Release date

2013

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

2013

Authors

,

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 12mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

232

ISBN-13

978-1-234-12199-0

Barcode

9781234121990

Categories

LSN

1-234-12199-9



Trending On Loot