Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

10 Cal. 371

Bradley v. Gardner

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1858

California Supreme Court · decided 1858-07-01

This was an action for slanderous words spoken by the defendant, of and concerning the plaintiff, and in his presence. On the trial, James Brownley, a witness for the defendant, after stating tbat plaintiff and defendant were quarreling in front of a saloon, in the town of Santa Clara, and detailing the slanderous words used by defendant, testified as follows : “ The plaintiff called Gardner a Christ-killer.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1923

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1858-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Baldwin, J., delivered the opinion of the Court

¶1Terry, C. J., and Field, J., concurring.

¶2Without considering the other assignments of error, it is apparent that the judgment must be reversed, on the ground that the Court below, on the trial, refused to admit the proof of the entire conversation between plaintiff and defendant at the time of the uttering of the alleged slanderous words. The question asked was as to the reply made by the plaintiff when the defendant uttered the words for speaking which suit was brought. That reply might have qualified or explained the words, or shown in what sense they were uttered, or even admitted their truth. At all events, they were a part of the transaction out of which the suit arose; and the plaintiff was entitled to have them if he thought them material. For this error, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

/10/cal/371 · .json · Public domain