SAMUEL LAND, BY NEXT FRIEND, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
TAMPA TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a libel action, holding that a newspaper's false publication accusing a young man of loitering in a disreputable part of town constitutes libel per se without need for special damages allegations.
A false, unprivileged publication in a newspaper stating that the plaintiff 'hangs around in a disreputable part of' a named city is libelous per se because its natural and proximate consequence necessarily causes injury to the plaintiff's personal, social, or business relations, making allegations of special damages unnecessary.
“A civil action for libel will lie when there has been a false and unpriviliged publication by letter or otherwise, which exposes a person to distrust, hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy or which causes such person to be avoided, or which has a tendency to injure such person in his office, occupation, business or employment.”
Establishes the foundational elements of civil libel liability
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSamuel Land, a minor represented by his next friend, sued the Tampa Times Publishing Company for publishing a false statement in the Tampa Daily Times…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Actionable Per Se cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, J.
An action for libel was brought against the company for “wickedly and maliciously intending to injure the plaintiff and bring him into public scandal and disgrace * wickedly and maliciously did compose and publish, and cause to be composed and published of and concerning the plaintiff, in a certain newspaper, called the Tampa Daily Times * a certain false, scandalous, malicious and defamatory libel, containing, among other things, the false, scandalous, malicious, defamatory and libelous matters following, of and concerning the plaintiff, viz: * * * “The lad (meaning the plaintiff) * * hangs -around in a disreputable part of” a stated city * *. It is alleged that plaintiff had enjoyed the esteem and good opinion of his neighbors and other worthy citizens of the State; and that by means of the publication he has been and is greatly injured in his good name, credit and reputation, and brought into public scandal and disgrace, and has been shunned by divers persons.
Plaintiff claims substantial damages. No special damages are alleged. A demurrer to the declaration was sustained; and the plaintiff declining to further plead or amend, final judgment for the defendant was rendered, and the plaintiff took writ of error. This action is for libel, not slander. A civil action for libel will lie when there has been a false and unpriviliged publication by letter or otherwise, which exposes a person to distrust, hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy or which causes such person to be avoided, or which has a tendency to injure such person in his office, occupation, business or employment.
Where a publication is false and not privileged, and is such that its natural and proximate consequence necessarily causes injury to a person in his personal, social, official or business relations of life, wrong and injury are presumed or implied, and such publication is actionable per se. Briggs v. Brown, 55 Fla. 417, 46 South. Rep. 325; Montgomery v. Knox, 23 Fla. 595, 3 South. Rep. 211; Jones v. Greeley, 25 Fla. 629, 6 South. Rep. 448.
The malicious publication in a newspaper article containing a false statement that the plaintiff “hangs around in a disreputable part of” a named city, is not privileged, and its natural and proximate consequences are to .cause an injury to him in his personal, social or business relations in life; and such a publication is libelous .per se. making an allegation of special damages unnecessary.
The judgment is reversed.
Shackleford,' C. J., and Taylor, Cockrell and Hooker, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jews FOR Jesus, Inc. v. Rapp, 997 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 2008)…ommunity,” except for this provision of the Restatement, this Court has stated that a plaintiff has a claim for defamation if he or she suffers injury in his or her “personal, social, official, or business relations.” Land v. Tampa Times Publ’g Co., 68 Fla. 546, 67 So. 130, 130 (Fla.1914). The most extensive discussion regarding the applicable “community” standard appears to be in Peck v. Tribune Co., 214 U.S. 185, 188, 29 S.Ct. 554, 53 L.Ed. 960 (1909), where the plaintiff brought a libel action against…
-
McClellan v. L'Engle, 74 Fla. 581 (Fla. 1917)…is actionable per se. Montgomery v. Knox, 23 Fla. 595, 3 South. Rep. 211; Jones v. Greeley, 25 Fla. 629, 6 South. Rep. 448; Ogden on Libel and Slander, 21; 25 Cyc. 243; Briggs v. Brown, 55 Fla. 417, 46 South. Rep. 325; Land v. Tampa Times Pub. Co., 68 Fla. 546, 67 South. Rep. 130; Stewart v. Codrington, 55 Fla. 327, 45 South. Rep. 809. The language of a publication alleged to be libelous should be construed as the common mind would naturally understand it. Jones, Varnum & Co. v. Townsend’s Administratrix…
-
Tip Top Grocery Co. v. Wellner, 135 Fla. 518 (Fla. 1938)…is actionable per se.” Montgomery v. Knox, 23 Fla. 595, 3 South. Rep. 211; Jones v. Greeley, 25 Fla. 629, 6 South. Rep. 448, Ogden on Libel and Slander, 21; 25 Cyc. 243; Briggs v. Brown, 55 Fla. 417, 46 South. Rep. 325; Land v. Tampa Times Pub. Co., 68 Fla. 546, 67 South. Rep. 130; Stewart v. Codrington, 55 Fla. 327, 45 South. Rep. 809. The language of a publication alleged to be libelous should be construed as the common mind would naturally understand it. Jones, Varnum & Co. v. Townsend’s Administratrix,…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Montgomery v. Knox, 23 Fla. 595 (Fla. 1887)
- C. H. Jones & Brother v. Greeley, 25 Fla. 629 (Fla. 1889)
- Briggs v. Merton v. Brown, 55 Fla. 417 (Fla. 1908)