Laurent v. Van Somple
Laurent v. Van Somple
161 Wis. 354; 154 N.W. 366; 1915 Wisc. LEXIS 213
Laurent v. Van Somple
Opinion of the Court
It is held in this case that the judgment was right because (1) the words alleged do not in their natural and ordinary meaning charge a criminal offense but merely slovenly or imperfect bookkeeping; (2) if it be held that they are defamatory in their nature and hence slanderous because special damage is alleged (Servatius v. Pichel, 34 Wis. 292), the answer is that loss of customers by a blacksmith cannot be held to be the natural or proximate result of a charge of bad bookkeeping.
By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.