“We hold that the dictating of this letter by the manager to the stenographer and her transcription of her notes into the written instrument consti- tutes publication within the purview of the law of libel: whether the re- lationship be that of master and servant or of coemployees of a corpora- tion”
How later courts described this case
- “We hold that the dictating of this letter by the manager to the stenographer and her transcription of her notes into the written instrument consti- tutes publication within the purview of the law of libel: whether the re- lationship be that of master and servant or of coemployees of a corpora- tion”
- “A defamatory writing, which on its face is libelous per se, is presumed to be unprivileged and therefore when the plaintiff proved the publication of this libel he made out a cause of action showing an unprivileged publication.”
- dictation to stenographer and her transcription of her notes “constitutes publication within the purview of the law of libel”
- jury may award punitive damages in addition to actual damages in a libel action
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Nuessle, J.
(dissenting). I am unable to agree with much that is said in the foregoing opinion and particularly with those portions of the opinion on which paragraphs four, five and seven of the syllabus are predicated. With respect to paragraphs four and five, I call attention to the cases of Freeman v. Dayton Scale Co. 159 Tenn 413, 19 SW2d 255 ; Prins v. Holland-North America Mortg. Co. 107 Wash 206, 181 P 680 , 5 ALR 451 , and Globe Furniture Co. v. Wright, 49 App DC 315, 265 F 873, 18 ALR 772 , and cases cited in their respective notes. And with respect to paragraph seven I call attention to 14 CJS pp 550 et seq.