Miller v. Howe

3 Citing cases

  1. Tucker v. Kilgore

    388 S.W.2d 112 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965)   Cited 32 times
    Holding that the "offensive character" of the words spoken to be sufficient to infer malice because the defendant did not have personal knowledge of the facts communicated, and did not exercise reasonable care in determining the truth prior to communication

    " 53 C.J.S. Libel and Slander ยง 89, pp. 143-144. See also Miller v. Howe, 245 Ky. 568, 53 S.W.2d 938 (1932), enumerating the requisites of the defense. "The condition attached to all such qualified privileges is that they must be exercised in a reasonable manner and for a proper purpose.

  2. Jefferson Dry Goods Co. v. Stoess

    304 Ky. 73 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947)   Cited 12 times
    Holding that the elements of false arrest are "a detention of the person" and that the detention was unlawful

    However, it might be remarked that the court below should have followed the statutes relative to the capias ad satisfaciendum. See also Kennedy v. Brink, 293 Ky. 447, 169 S.W.2d 292 and Miller v. Howe, 245 Ky. 568, 53 S.W.2d 938. Wherefore, the judgment is reversed as to the punitive damages awarded and affirmed as to the remainder, and the cause is remanded with directions to enter judgment accordingly.

  3. Kennedy v. Brink

    169 S.W.2d 292 (Ky. Ct. App. 1943)   Cited 2 times

    The soundness of the rule is apparent when we consider that a judicial determination must be made before the writ may be authorized, and, obviously, the time for making such a determination should be when the judgment is entered. See, also, Blair v. Russell, 14 Bush 412; Miller v. Howe, 245 Ky. 568, 53 S.W.2d 938; and 21 Am. Jur. 334; and also Leavison v. Rosenthal, 5 Ky. Law Rep. 132, for a superior court holding to the effect that a motion for such a writ, which was made at the next term after the rendition of the judgment, was too late. Judgment affirmed.