One said of him, Thou art forsworn, and hast taken a false oath at Hereford Assises, against such a one, naming the party. Arid the opinion of the Court (the Chief Justice and Justice Crooke being absent) was against the action. But they conceived that the action would have lied, if the defendant had said, Thou art forsworn, and hast taken a false oath at the Assises, against such an one, with averment that he was sworn in the cause.
It was said at the Bar, that it was adjudged in this Court in Appletons case, that where a man said unto another by way of interrogatory, Where is my piece thou stolest from me? that it was actionable. Justice Jones remembred this case, where one said, J. S. told me, that J. N. stole a horse, but I do not believe him. This with averment that J. S. did not say any such thing, would bear an action. Justice Barkley said, that an action was brought upon these words, You are no thief? and that these words with averment, which imply an affirmative, will bear an action.
It was said to a merchant, that he was a cousening knave. And the opinion of the Court was, (the Chief Justice and Justice Crooke being absent) that the words were not actionable, because he doth not touch him in his profession, for the words are too general : but it was said, that to call him bankrupt was actionable. And in all cases where a man is touched in his profession, the words are actionable. But to call a lawyer a bankrupt, is not actionable. Justice Jones said, that Serjeant Heath brought an action for these words : one said of him, that he had undone many ; and it was adjudged actionable ; because he touched him in his profession.
Kingston upon Hull is a particular and limitcd jurisdiction, and they held plea of and which was made out of their jurisdiction ; and thereupon a capias was awarded against the obligor, who was arrested upon it, and suffered by the sheriff to escape : and the opinion of the Court was clear, that no escape would lie against the sheriff, upon the difference in the case of the Marshalsea, that if the Court hold plea of a thing within their jurisdiction, but proceed erroneously, that it is avoidable by error ; but if they have not jurisdiction of the cause, all is void, and coram non judice. 11 H. 4. and 19 E. 4. acc. So in the principal case : for they held plea of a thing which was out of their jurisdiction, and therefore the whole proceeding being void, no action can lie against the sheriff, for there was no escape.
Citations:
[1675] EngR 1528, (1675) March NR 7, (1675) 82 ER 387
Links:
Defamation
Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.405653