*1
200 SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER
ment of facts that
not be
ure of
$600.
which would
sum
$600. This
of the
to fix
record
the sum of
ages
the record.”
pleading,
court
ruled.
value
while we find
rect measure of
sition.
fixing
claimed an
the
was
cial
what
have been invoked
proper
What
have value.”
had
it
property,
had
dence
a
been based on the
The
to no
reason, is overruled.
damages,
sawmill
this
appellant
tention to
we
therefore
assignment,
there
general demurrer,
ed
“The court
judgment
“The court should
“The
The third
This is also submitted
We have examined
If it be true that
[3]
[2] There
wholly
at least
plaintiffs
plaintiff
think
connection with this
point
by appellant
no evidence
not warranted
exception
connection.
must
a measure
authority sustaining
we have
was
damages,
assignment
successfully contended that the court
claim of
value,
court
error on the
purposes,
excess
unfit
fixing
destroyed by fire, which had rendered
refused to
but does not
as insisted
complaint
out “error
cannot
it was incumbent
second
record
have
for said
which to
had,
improper
being true,
$600, yet
appellant
is
property
property
does not
which
for the reason
trial court
assignment
damages
erred in
erred in
Appellant
that no witness fixes
have warranted the court
the action
directed
$600,
said
damages,
defect
second
damages,
that it could
to show
assignment
consider
in that
amount,
thereupon.
damages.”
$600,
nor
is submitted
deliver the
is
court’s
there is evidence in the
rest his
face of
appellees’
in this connection
reverse
apparent
was
for.
allege any
we find
awarding
use
the statement
a¡1
should
allege
rendering
fixing appellees’
rendering
in
at a
proposition
any exception
this
reference to the sec-
assignment
incorrect
upon
is:
has cited
assignment,
as it
the reason
and also
damage,
question
of the court
follows:
warranted
$2,000,
that this
whatever
proof
plaintiff’s
and could
think
aas
private
his contention
a court
assignment,
judgment.”
connection. We of this
proposition,
that the
this
means of a
upon appellant,
is as follows:
less sum than
have called
only
same,
this
alleges
There
damages
record
plaintiff
action on
proper
him the sum
showed
judgment
as a
case
proposition.
that it can-
without evi- and
the face
measure of
be used for
this court
as sawmill
opinion
was
testimony
demurrer,
plaintiff’s
that there
because
for that
of facts
property
is noth-
that
that
exactly
because
in this:
reserv-
propo-
or cor-
meas-
state-
failed
done,
dam-
over-
trial
at a
then
does
have
base
this
spe-
im-
the ruled.
did
at-
in
take
for
existing
not made
therein shall
libel,
publishers.
trial court is affirmed.
defense
out
This
any penal
mitigation,
a
in this
ment,
its
fact for the decision of
the
proposition.
proposition. We have examined the record
and boiler at
time it
plaintiff
plaintiff
out
the
is
ence
demand the consideration of
the same are
trial
certainty,
(Court
and also
at
ance
dence in the'
plaintiffs,
dence.”
ond
court
KOEHLER v. DUBOSE
Privilege.
“The
“The court
This
defense,
This
The fifth
[4]
Libel
justice,
Jan.
contrary
affected
effect,
return to
Act
libel.
defense
the time it was
plaintiff,
time
difference
impartial
proof
away
assignment
at the time of its
proposition
case,
in
authorizes'
court could
was
The
and have concluded that
was
of Civil
appellant’s brief,
court erred
was tendered
overruled.
27th
value of the
case
assignment
assignment
to make
assignment,
failed
it was turned over
and Slander
the basis
what
privilege to
so
because
etc.,
any
Held,
1918. On
of actual
what
fourth
enabled to
assignment
testimony,
Leg.
because the
be construed
determined
in
account of
We think that
appellee,
the time of the lease
erred in
overruled.
between the value of the
privilege, and does not limit
Appeals
inquiry touching
existing
assignment presents
shall
record
provides
on the
completely.”
Jan.
its value was at the time of
no reversible error
connection
except
evidence
c.
out his case
determine,
in
assignment
it is made the
definition
publication
proof
error
and not based on
machinery
is also submitted as
malice,
rendering judgment
value
back
Motion for
newspaper
entirely
of Texas. San
upon
defense to
subject
returned
rendering judgment
and show
and the court
relative
deemed
&wkey;>34—
delivery
also
determine the differ-
1918.)
of error is:
judgment of the court
of certain matters in
necessarily disposes
action for
to amend
et
the truth shall be
judgment
which the trial
al.
submitted
with reasonable
trial
far as
this
this
this
by
of error
too
libel, including
same is
in
such that
Rehearing,
judgment
a civil
Defenses
preserves
(No.
this
libel,
duty
question
assignment
court,
court,
and in this
machinery
matter of
and at the
appellant,
libel with-
preponder-
in a court
fair,
periodical
testimony
appellee.
Antonio.
5937.)
pointed
having,
the evi-
assign-
nor to
for the
of the
defines
repeal
engine
error,
is:
as a
over-
true,,
evi-
at
—
Digests
Key-Numbered
topic
KEy
in all
and Indexes
see same
-NUMBER
For other cases
*2
KOEHLER v: DUBOSE
n
—
<&wkey;36
<&wkey;>220 Construction—Legis-
8. Libel
and
Slander
Absolute
Statutes
—
Privilege
Privileged.
lative
—Matters
Construction.
privilege against
liability
Acts
amended
Absolute
art.
as
for
Rev. St.
bodies,
legislative
Leg.
206, providing
extends
to
85th
c.
any judicial
military
repeal
proceedings,
title shall
construed to amend
and
and naval of-
subject
penal
take
to
nor
ficers.
law
away any existing
for
a
—
defense to
civil action
&wkey;>41
9. Libel
and
Qualified
Slander
otherwise,
all
Privilege
Privileged
but that
libel at common law
—
Matters.
expressly preserved,
thereby
is
such
not a
deprived
but
are
privilege
Qualified
extends to
communi-
prior
legislative
that the
law
construction
upon any subject-matter
cations
defenses,
, defendants
party
of common-law
communicating
interest,
an
ref-
or in
apparently
cure
failure
enacted
to
duty
person
erence to which he
a
hav-
has a
to
prior
a
of the
of the
ing
codifiers to include
corresponding
duty,
a
em-
interest or
and
law
Statutes.
duty
Revised
legal
cases
braces
where the
is not a
imperfect
a
but one of moral character or an
<&wkey;19
3. Libel
and Slander
—Construction
obligation.
Language
“Erequent.”
Used —
—
<&wkey;100(7)
10. Libel
and Slander
Privi-
petition
against
remonstrating
a
Where
lege-Necessity
Alleging
and Prov-
granting
liquor
aof
new
license to a saloon
ing Malice.
keeper
frequented
place,
stated
minors
qualifiedly privi-
aWhere
communication
experience
difficulty
finding
and
to
seemed
no
leged,
prima
the inference of
is rebutted
malice
buy liquor
some
one who would
for
facie,
party complain-
it
and
devolves
conveyed
the idea that
innuendo
allege
prove
to
and
malice.
liquor
keeper
guilty
selling
saloon
to minors
<&wkey;38(l) Privilege
11. Libel
and Slander
pertinently
reasonably
arose from
—
Proceedings.
—Judicial
“frequent”
charge,
the
a
or
mean
it at
to
since
,St.
7435, 7436, requiring
Under Rev.
arts.
often,
means to
resort to often
visit
to
applicants
liquor
apply
for
to
to the
licenses
habitually,
frequent
a saloon
to
comptroller
public
permit,
accounts for a
the minors
it and
entered
remained
they
authorizing
permit
him to
then
issue a
which is
merely
pleasure,
and not
assem-
judge,
authorizing
county
filed
-with
vicinity
messengers
sent
bled in the
for
the
revoke
to
under certain circumstances
a
selling
liquor, especially
agent
knowingly
habitually
as the
licenses,
petition
comp-
filed
with
convey
liquor
the idea that the
protesting against
troller
issued to a saloon
new license
sold
be used minors.
keeper
privileged
not
definitions,
[Ed. Note.—For other
see Words
judicial proceeding,
a communication
a
made in
Phrases,
Series,.
First
Fre-
and Second
of the statements
are
therein
quent.]
guilty of libel if
the accusations
made in
bad
faith and with malice.
—
&wkey;>15
4. Libel
and Slander
Actionable
”
<&wkey;36rPrivileged
12. Libel
and Slander
W
—
obds —Statutes—‘
‘Libel.
open
petition
Communications —Petitions
to the Gov-
to the construction that
charge
keeper
selling
liquor
ernment.
a saloon
absolutely privileged
Such a
knowingly
agents,
exposed
minors
their
because
public hatred, contempt,
ridicule,
federal and
him to
government
injury,
Leg.
Constitutions
for
financial
within Act 27th
c.
grievances;
griev-
a
1, defining
tending
redress
“libel”
aas
defamation
government
against
sought
injure
reputation
thereby ances
cor-
person,
to be
of a
public
expose
or
hatred,
ridicule,
rected
communication.
contempt,
him to
injury,
Privileg-
etc.
<&wkey;36,
financial
Libel and
Slander
41 —
—
ed
[Ed. .Note.—For other
Communications
Petitions
see Words
definitions;
Phrases,
Government.
Series,
First
Libel.]
and Second
appli-
comp-
7435, requiring
Rev.
Under
St. art.
liquor
apply
5. Libel
for
cants
and Slander
Construction
licenses
Language
public
permit,
troller of
a
Used.
accounts
and to
petition remonstrating against
showing
applicant
Where a
the file an affidavit
liquor
granting
stated that
keeper
license to
saloon
not violated
ing
sell-
laws
boys
tempted
drink,
minors,
providing
etc.,
minor
to students or
permit
this meant a
innuendo
violation
the issuance
shall be filed
allowing
liq-.
purchase intoxicating
judge,
requiring
them
with
the
article
county judge
a fair one.
set
uors was
application
give
hearing
thorizing
granting
izing
notice of the
au-
the
&wkey;>19
6. Libel
and Slander
—Construction
property
certain
owners to
contest
Language
Used.
license,
and article
author-
petition remonstrating
statements
licenses,
to revoke
there is
against
granting
license
statutory justification
cir-
(cid:127)
liquor,
able to
minors were
tempted
that defendant sold them
sold it to their
charges
obtain
and were culating
comptroller protest-
drink, being open
to the construction ing against
of a
new license to
liquor,
knowingly
keeper
expiration
months
saloon
persons
agents,
making
license,
application
his
for
in
lutely
in
a time when no
escape
effects
their
of
they
pending,
charges
a new
there-
language by
lieved
stating
also
therein that
be-
keeper
against
the saloon
abso-
neither
keeper
-place
tried to run
saloon
qualifiedly privileged, especially
nor
they
according
blame
that
special
and that
laid no
justifying
par-
communications
cases
between
him;
impossible
to conceive
subject-matter,
privilege
interested in a
ties
habitually
mi-
obtained
apparently
apply
does not
when the communica-
discovering
the seller
nors without
the fraud-
published
tions are
and others not interested al-
acquainted
contents,
to become
lowed
with'their
<&wkey;51(l)
7. Libel
and Slander
—Absolute
by circulating
Privilege
is done
and obtain-
—Effect
of Malice.
ing signatures
any persons desiring
defense, regardless
Absolute
sign it.
malice,
privileged-
cases
is-
since
in the interest of
considered
all
sentiments
welfare that
Appeal
Court,
from District
Medina Coun-
permitted to
should be
utter
R,
ty;
Judge.
Burney,
H.
speak
thoughts freely
fearlessly.
Action
Walter Koehler
W. L.
Key-Numbered Digests
topic
oiher
see
cases
KEY-NUMBER in all
Indexes
<8nroFor
REPORTER
200 SOUTHWESTERN
young
operated
this
and
men of
ruin and
debauch
others.
From
Dubose and
defendants,
age
yet
section,
of tender
while
appeals.
plaintiff
Reversed
temptation to drink
withstand the
unable to
remanded.
minority.
on account of their
*3
maintaining
pride
an extra
“We
ourselves in
Biclsett,
of
Long
&
Davis &
and Ward
good school,
saloon in
the
the fact to be
but
aver
Hondo,
Blocker,
Antonio,
of
San
and V. H.
large
a
our efforts
measure counteracts
Hertzberg
appellant.
and
Kercheville
&
undoes the
in the direction of education and
work
our
of
school.
Antonio,
Harris,
Mack
San
all of
O. O.
lay
special
man
no
the
who
“We
blame
Ply,
Kercheville,
Devine,
of
&
De Montel
of
operates
run the same
place,
the
tries to
for we believe he
R. Mar-
L.
Hondo,
and
and John T. Briscoe
law,
owing
according
to
to
present
appellees.
Devine,
as-
shall,
fact that
are
the
there
no
of
officers
both
practice
him,
un-
for certain
sist
common
scrupulous persons
buy
damages
deliver
and
PLY,
a suit for
J. This
O.
owing
young
liquor they
all the
and
minors
to the inherent hell
want
against
by appellant
L. Dubose
W.
stituted
commodity
in
sold
the
dam-
the
It was
and 66 others.
ages
hoped
proffer
proud
men whom
their
fortnight
laid at
had
mothers
citizens,
good
publication
circula-
and
are
state and nation as
arose from the
and
wretches
converted into drunken
general
A
instruments.
tion of
written
feet.
special exception
sus-
demurrer
against
li-
a new
“Wherefore we remonstrate
petition.
pres-
expiration
being
tained to
at the
of
cense
issued
appel-
by
signed
ent one.
instrument
The first
Lytle, Texas,
our hands at
“Witness
this
signed. The
lees,
not
other was
and the
day
October,
D.
16th
of
A.
1916.”
signed
follows:
is as
document
copied
into
The two instruments were
Comptroller,
Terrell, State
B.
Hon. H.
“To the
them.
and libel was declared
Austin, Texas:
instruments,
con-
or
of
taxpayers
If
either
citizens,
undersigned,
“We, the
men,
including
doc-
families,
matter,
business
demurrer
heads of
tain libelous
school-teachers,
lawyers,
ministers,
tors,
residents
peti-
sustained,
for the
not have been
Texas,
county,
Devine, Medina
of
necessary
every allegation
tion contains
against
remonstration
to file
want
employing
action,
cause of
some
granting
er,
and
county.
Koehl- establish the
to Walter
a
license
of
new
county
operates
Bexar
Bexar
saloon
a
line
on
arising
pertinent
from
innuendoes
stated as
just
lines,
county
inside
Atascosa
publications
papers.
of the
Twenty-Seventh Legislature
In 1901 the
place
is within eleven
submit that
“We
police
town,
or
passed
there is no
our
and that
miles of
protection
is
from over
the first civil libel
law ever enacted
place
the saloon
near the
where
Texas;
prior
in
to that
time the common
place
frequent
operated;
that minors
only
cases,
guide in
law
ex
libel
county
great
section
this
publications
cept
experience
difficulty
finding
in so far as certain
some
seem
one
buy
liquor for them.
who will
by
Legislature,
penalized
having
on ac-
trouble in our school
“We
imputation
chastity to
fe
of want of
boys
temptation
that are
count of
Range,
male. Hatcher v.
98
81
Tex.
among
young
S.
school,
men who are
whom
289;
Tribune,
from
to our
sent here
distance
school.
v. Galveston
W.
Guisti
fact
to be
further aver the
“We
150 S.
constantly
brawls,
happening
fights
are
and near the
over which hundreds of
route to
held,
so,
properly
has
and we think
highway
saloon,
comprehend
pass
people
enacted
the law of 1901 was
have to
en
,San Antonio,
occasionally there
subject
entire
libel
and embrace the
by
men;
drunken
murders committed
causes,
prec
without reference to rules or
civil
boy
recently
only
slashed
from this town
was cut
only
in this
other states.
edents
or
Not
there,
does
by
drunken Mexicans
live;
expected
he is not
lives of
wounds
the statute cover all actionable cases of libel
pass
necessity
children who must of
women and
rights
state,
given
but it
in this
to those
danger.
there are
subjects
who are the
not accorded
against a
li-
remonstrate
“Wherefore we
new
expiration
pres-
the common
to them
law. The
cense
ent one.
issued at
(Acts
26),
Leg.
in 1901
27th
as enacted
e.
day
at Devine this the 16th
“Dated
Oc-
follows, omitting
emergency
clause r
tober,
D. 1916.
A.
expressed
A1.
libel is
defamation
“Section
“Respectfully submitted.”
writing,
printing
signs
pictures,
or
or
Signed W. L. Dubose and 66 other defend-
tending
memory
drawings,
blacken the
or
the
one who is
ants.
tending
injure
reputation
dead, or
unsigned
is as
instrument
follows:
thereby
alive,
expose
pub-
him
Terrell,
Comp-
hatred, contempt
ridicule,
H.
State
“To the Honorable
B.
lic
or financial in-
troller, Austin,
impeach
integrity
jury,
virtue or
the
pose
financial
honesty,
Texas:
or to
reputation
any one,
publish
citizens, taxpayers
undersigned
“We,
any
thereby
including
natural
ex-
families,
men,
defects
business
doc-
heads of
person
public hatred,
lawyers
ministers,
tors,
school-teachers,
ridicule or
resi-
take
injury.
Lytlq,
county, Texas,
Atascosa
dents of
In
in
the defendant
“Sec.
to file this our remonstration
leave
evidence,
specially
give
pleaded, in
one Walter
new
Koehler
exemplary
punitive
mitigation
damages,
county
operates
line saloon
Bexar
on the
who
and
county
just
the circumstances
the libelous
intentions under which
lines
Atascosa
inside
Bexar
publication
made,
on the Laredo-San Antonio road.
line
apology,
place
public
and
The truth of
such
tion.
correction or retraction made
is within a mile
submit
“We
complained
town,
place
published
him of the libel
of.
half of our little
whatever;
police protection
the statement or statements
that our minor
boys
will
finding
publication shall be
defense to such ac-
some
have no trouble
one who
buy
and that
them
KOEHLER v. DUBOSE
following
gave
publication
mat-
definition
fully
held that the
of
periodical,
“See. 3.
newspaper
defined
ters
state,
of libel
covering
that could
this
used
shall be deemed
section
subject.
de-
matter
any action for
made the basis
shall
sufficiency
fenses was not considered. The
proof
malice.
actual
libel without
impartial
fair,
only question
the
the
account of
true and
“L A
was the
justice,
proceedings
court
unless
in a court
Supreme
Case, and
Court
Guisti
same,
publication
prohibits
preservation
of the statute as to the
court the ends of
when
justice
of common-law
adverted
not be
the same should
demand that
orders;
published,
official
language,
the court so
to or discussed. We hold that the
ad-
authorized
“Nothing in
act
be construed
shall
the law.
ministration of
* * *
any existing
away
take
defense
impartial
fair,
of all
“2.
true
account
n
*4
action,” preserved
legislative
ato
civil
secured
that are
executive and
including reports
record,
of
of
made a matter
legislative committees,
Legislature
they
defendants all defenses as
common
existed
any
of
debate
may
except
law,
they
far as
committees.
libel in
affected
the definition of
be
pub-
fair,
impartial
A
true and
account of
“3.
pub-
organized
meetings,
and conducted
first section of the act. To hold that no one
lic
only.
purposes
lic
can
the benefit of
defense of
fair
comment or criti-
“4.
reasonable
except
privileged
publishers
communication
public
of
acts
officials and
cism of the official
of
neigh
cause
man
advises his
would
bor as to the character and
who
published
public
matters of
concern
general
ability
information.
aof
doc
“,Sec. Nothing in
construed
4.
act shall be
this
servant,
tor, lawyer, merchant, workman, or
repeal
penal law on the sub-
to amend or
ject
or
affecting
to matters
who testifies as
witness
away any
libel,
existing
of
nor to take
de-
act
another,
of
libel,
character
this
action
nor shall
fense
affect
after be
prior
to civil
may
pending, or that
here-
suits now
judge
opinion,
renders an
to be without
arising
brought upon a cause
of
against a suit
It cannot
defenses
for libel.
taking
act.”
effect of this
Legislature
be
intended
assumed that
condition,
plain
lan
create
and the
it is distinct
[1] In section 4 of that
s
guage
clearly provided
existing
ly
desire
of the statute evidence
that certain
by provide against any
things
such condition of affairs.
be
matters and
shall not
affected
judges
opinions
specified.
act,
The In
of
render
the case
each matter
enacted,
second,
penal
libel,
and
and
1901
the law of
was
as
ed since
first
laws
time,
occurring
libel,
the under facts
since that
to civil actions for
defenses
questions
third,
arising
law
asked of a witness
as to
before the
cases
they
attorney,
provision
been held
it has
If
clear
was enacted.
to
privileged
penal
equally
s
v.
statutes,
Allen
to were
communications.
it
clear
i
Earnest,
1101; Kruegel
145 W.
v. Cock
ever
S.
in civil
No
cases.
defenses
questioned
rell,
would
Koehler v. Dubose
200 S.W. 238
Tex. App.1918Check TreatmentAI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.