Gandia v. Pettingill,
222 U.S. 452 (1912)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Gandia v. Pettingill, 222 U.S. 452 (1912)

Gandia v. Pettingill

No. 97

Argued December 14, 1911

Decided January 9, 1912

222 U.S. 452


In the absence of express malice or excess, publication of actual facts is not libelous, and in case of mere excess without express malice, the only liability is for damages attributable to the excess, and refusal of the trial court to charge to this effect is error.

Quaere whether attributing to a person conduct that is lawful can be libelous.

The stricter practice is to note the exceptions before the jury retires, but if all the exceptions are noted in open court after jury returns and no wrong is suffered, an exception will not be sustained on that ground.

4 P.R.F. 383 reversed.

Page 222 U. S. 453

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 222 U. S. 456

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.