WAINMAN v BOWLER
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 13923 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1978 JOHN F7AINMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, LARRY C. BOWLER, d/b/a TEE DANIELS COUNTY LEADER, Defendant and Respondent. Appeal from: District Court of the Fifteenth Judicial District, Honorable M. James Sorte, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Robert A. Meldahl araued, Fairview, Montana For Respondent: Traynor and Hoversland, Scobey, Montana Ken W. Hoversland argued, Scobey, Montana Submitted: Decided: Filed: MPR 2 5 "6 1 Jan. 26, 1978 MAR 2 8 1 7 98 J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. Mr. T h i s i s a n a p p e a l by p l a i n t i f f from a judgment on t h e P l a i n t i f f ' s a c t i o n f o r l i b e l w a s commenced pleadings. f o l l o w i n g p u b l i c a t i o n o f a r t i c l e s by d e f e n d a n t i n The - D a n i e l s County Leader. The c o m p l a i n t a l l e g e d t h a t d e f e n d a n t p u b l i s h e d t h r e e a r t i c l e s c o n t a i n i n g l i b e l o u s s t a t e m e n t s which were f a l s e , u n p r i v i l e g e d , and c a l c u l a t e d t o d r i v e p l a i n t i f f from h i s office. Those s t a t e m e n t s , s e g r e g a t e d by p l a i n t i f f from t h e e n t i r e a r t i c l e s , a r e a s follows: September 1 6 , 1976: "There h a s been a d e r e l i c t i o n of d u t y , b u l l y i n g of p e o p l e , concealment o r d e l i b e r a t e non-recording of p u b l i c r e c o r d s , p l u s abysmal l a c k of normal and r e a s o n a b l e a c c e s s t o t h e r e c o r d s which a r e r e c o r d e d . " October 2 1 , 1976: " I n c r e a s i n g d i s c o u r t e s y and n e g l i g e n c e by County and Scobey law enforcement o f f i c i a l s i n d e a l i n g w i t h c i t i zens of t h e a r e a and ~ ~ s i t o r s . " November 11, 1976: " of p o l i c e i n Scobey." * * * b u l l y boy c h i e f P l a i n t i f f ' s f i r s t a c t i o n f o r l i b e l was commenced on December 2 , 1976. This a c t i o n w a s dismissed. A second a c t i o n was f i l e d a f t e r p r o p e r r e t r a c t i o n t i m e had p a s s e d p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 64-207.1, R.C.M. 1947. Defendant answered p l a i n t i f f ' s c o m p l a i n t and f i l e d a motion f o r judgment on t h e p l e a d i n g s . grounds. The motion was based on two F i r s t , t h e c o m p l a i n t s t a t e s no c a u s e of a c t i o n upon which r e l i e f c a n be g r a n t e d . Second, i f t h e s t a t e m e n t s a r e viewed i n t h e l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o t h e p l a i n t i f f , d e f e n d a n t ' s s t a t u t o r y d e f e n s e s of t r u t h and p r i v i l e g e n e g a t e p l a i n t i f f ' s claims. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t g r a n t e d d e f e n d a n t ' s motion f o r judgment o n t h e p l e a d i n g s and d i s m i s s e d p l a i n t i f f ' s c o m p l a i n t w i t h p r e j u d i c e . The Memorandum Opinion accompanying t h a t order reads: "The i m p o r t a n t p l e a d i n g i n t h i s c a s e i s t h e Complaint and a r e a d i n g of t h e Complaint r e v e a l s t h a t a l l of t h e r e f e r e n c e s i n t h e D a n i e l s County Leader t h a t w e r e p u b l i s h e d had r e f e r e n c e t o a g e n e r a l c l a s s of p e o p l e , and a l t h o u g h t h e P l a i n t i f f was w i t h i n t h a t c l a s s , t h e l a n g u a g e was i n s u f f i c i e n t t o c o n s t i t u t e l i b e l p e r s e . One e x c e p t i o n w a s made and t h a t w a s t h e p u b l i c a t i o n on November 11, 1976, when t h e E d i t o r of t h e D a n i e l s County Leader r e f e r r e d t o t h e P l a i n t i f f a s a ' b u l l y boy c h i e f of p o l i c e i n S c o b e y ' . T h i s l a n g u a g e i s n o t l i b e l p e r s e , and t h e f a c t s c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e innuendo a r e n o t s e t f o r t h i n a s a t i s f a c t o r y manner. In addition, i f l i b e l i s n o t p e r se i t must a p p e a r by innuendo and s p e c i a l damages must be a l l e g e d . T h i s was n o t done i n t h i s c a s e . " Two i s s u e s a r e r a i s e d f o r r e v i e w : 1. Whether t h e s t a t e m e n t s a r e l i b e l o u s p e r s e ? 2. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n g r a n t i n g a judgment on t h e p l e a d i n g s ? I s s u e 1. P l a i n t i f f ' s f i r s t i s s u e r e q u i r e s a r e v i e w of t h e pleadings. On t h e f a c e of t h e p l e a d i n g s , it i s o b v i o u s t h a t t h e t h e o r y of p l a i n t i f f ' s c o m p l a i n t i s l i b e l p e r se. N s p e c i a l damages w e r e a l l e g e d i n t h e c o m p l a i n t . o law i s c l e a r on t h i s s u b j e c t . Montana To s t a t e a c a u s e of a c t i o n f o r l i b e l , t h e c o m p l a i n t must s t a t e a l i b e l p e r se a c t i o n o r p l e a d s p e c i a l damages t o uphold a l i b e l p e r quod a c t i o n . S t e f f e s v . Crawford, ( 1 9 6 3 ) , 143 Mont. 4 3 , 47, 386 P.2d 842. A c c o r d i n g l y , on t h e f a c e of t h e p l e a d i n g s and i n l i g h t of s e t t l e d law, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t was f a c e d w i t h t h e question: Were t h e s t a t e m e n t s l i b e l o u s p e r s e ? These s t a t e - ments must be examined w i t h t h e a i d of t h e r u l e s of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a s s e t f o r t h by t h i s C o u r t i n numerous c a s e s . K e l l e r v . Safeway S t o r e s , I n c . , In ( 1 9 4 0 ) , 1 1 Mont. 28, 31-32, 1 108 P.2d 605, t h i s C o u r t summarized t h e r u l e s of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n f o r l i b e l and s l a n d e r c a s e s : " I n d e t e r m i n i n g whether f a l s e d e f a m a t o r y words s a i d t o have been spoken of and c o n c e r n i n q t h e p a r t y complaining a;e o r a r e n o t s l a n d e r o i s se, t h e o p p r o b r i o u s words a r e t o b e c o n s t r u e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r u s u a l , p o p u l a r and n a t u r a l meaning and common a c c e p t a t i o n , t h a t i s , i n t h e s e n s e i n which p e r s o n s o u t o f c o u r t and of o r d i n a r y i n t e l l i g e n c e would u n d e r s t a n d them, f o r t h e presumption i s t o be indulged t h a t t h e t h i r d p a r t y o r p a r t i e s p r e s e n t s o u n d e r s t o o d them. * * * "The s t a t e m e n t made must be viewed by t h e c o u r t as a s t r a n g e r might look a t it, w i t h o u t t h e a i d of s p e c i a l knowledge p o s s e s s e d by t h e p a r t i e s concerned. * * * "The l a n g u a g e used must be s u s c e p t i b l e of b u t o n e meaning and t h a t a n o p p r o b r i o u s one. * * * "The a l l e g e d d e f a m a t o r y m a t t e r i s t o be c o n s t r u e d a s a n e n t i r e t y and w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e remaini n g p o r t i o n s of t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n . * * * " I f t h e language i s n o t s l a n d e r o u s -rp e se, i t c a n n o t be made s o by innuendo * * * b e c a u s e t h e term " p e r s e " means by i t s e l f ; simply a s s u c h ; i n i t s own n a t u r e w i t h o u t r e f e r e n c e t o i t s r e l a t i o n s . * * * A s o t h e r w i s e s t a t e d i n Manley v . H a r e r , pe s supra: 'Words a r e d e f a m a t o r y -r-e which upon t h e i r f a c e and w i t h o u t t h e a i d of e x t r i n s i c proof a r e i n j u r i o u s t o t h e p e r s o n c o n c e r n i n g whom t h e y a r e spoken. I f t h e i n j u r i o u s c h a r a c t e r o f t h e words d o e s n o t a p p e a r from t h e i r f a c e when t a k e n i n t h e i r p l a i n and n a t u r a l meaning and a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s e n s e i n which t h e y a p p e a r t o have been u s e d , t h e y a r e n o t d e f a m a t o r y p e r se b u t a r e s a i d t o r e q u i r e i n n u e n d o . ' " Applying t h e s e r u l e s o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t o t h e a r t i c l e s of September 1 6 , 1976, and October 2 1 , 1976, r e v e a l s s e v e r a l v i o l a t i o n s of t h e r u l e s by t h e p l a i n t i f f . First, plaintiff s e g r e g a t e d t h e s t a t e m e n t s from t h e e n t i r e a r t i c l e s and i m p o r t e d a l i b e l o u s p e r se meaning t o them. may n o t b e s e g r e g a t e d and c o n s t r u e d a l o n e . The words used The e n t i r e p r i n t e d s t a t e m e n t must be viewed by t h e c o u r t a s a s t r a n g e r might look a t it. S t e f f e s , supra. A r e v i e w of t h e e n t i r e a r t i c l e s of September 16 and October 21, t a k i n g t h e s t a t e ments w i t h r e l a t i o n t o t h e whole and c o n s t r u i n g them w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e r e m a i n i n g p o r t i o n s , n e g a t e s any o p p r o b r i o u s meaning. Second, p l a i n t i f f a l l e g e s t h e s t a t e m e n t s r e f e r t o him p e r s o n a l l y . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t n o t e d , and we a g r e e , t h e s t a t e m e n t s r e f e r t o a g e n e r a l c l a s s of p e o p l e . While t h e Scobey P o l i c e Department and t h e D a n i e l s County S h e r i f f ' s o f f i c e a r e s m a l l , t h e a r t i c l e s , when r e a d i n t h e i r e n t i r e t y , r e f e r t o t h e d e p a r t m e n t s o v e r a p e r i o d of y e a r s . There have been many men employed by t h e s e d e p a r t m e n t s t o whom t h e A t no p o i n t i n e i t h e r a r t i c l e s and s t a t e m e n t s c o u l d r e f e r . a r t i c l e i s t h e defendant personally r e f e r r e d t o o r i s he s p e c i f i c a l l y set out. To b e l i b e l o u s p e r se, t h e p u b l i c a - t i o n must c o n t a i n d e f a m a t o r y words s p e c i f i c a l l y d i r e c t e d a t t h e person claiming i n j u r y . I n c . v . Denver P o s t , I n c . , P.2d 1 3 1 , 133. , I n t e r - S t a t e D e t e c t i v e Bureau, ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 29 Colo.App. Granger v . Time, I n c . , 568 P.2d 535, 34 St.Rep. 313, 484 (1977), Mont. 983, 989. T h i r d , p l a i n t i f f a l l e g e s t h e s t a t e m e n t s have a n opprob r i o u s meaning. The r u l e s of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n r e q u i r e t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e must b e s u s c e p t i b l e of b u t o n e meaning t o c o n s t i t u t e l i b e l p e r se. S t e f f e s , supra. Such u n e q u i v o c a l s t a t e m e n t i s n o t p r e s e n t i n t h i s case. A r e a d e r of t h e e n t i r e a r t i c l e s c o u l d r e a c h more t h a n one meaning. The a r t i c l e o f November 11, 1976, r e f e r r i n g t o t h e p l a i n t i f f a s " b u l l y boy c h i e f of p o l i c e " r e q u i r e s t h i s C o u r t t o review t h e n a t u r e o f t h e words. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t r u l e d t h a t t h i s s t a t e m e n t d o e s n o t i m p o r t s u c h a meaning t h a t l i b e l p e r s e c a n be imputed. W agree. e The d e f i n i t i o n of l i b e l p e r se i s w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d and l o n g s t a n d i n g i n Montana. ( 1 9 1 5 ) , 50 Mont. L e m m e r v . The " T r i b u n e " e t a l . , 559, 564, 148 P . 338; Manley v . H a r e r , ( 1 9 2 5 ) , 73 Mont. 253, 235 P . 757; G r i f f i n v . Opinion p u b l i s h i n g Co., ( 1 9 4 3 ) , 1 1 4 Mont. 502, 508, 138 P.2d 580; ~ e w i s . v R e a d e r ' s ~ i g e s t , ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 162 Mont. 4 0 1 , 406, 512 P.2d 702. Where t h e i n j u r i o u s c h a r a c t e r of t h e words d o e s n o t a p p e a r from t h e i r f a c e when t a k e n i n t h e i r p l a i n and n a t u r a l meaning and a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s e n s e i n which t h e y a p p e a r t o have been used, they a r e n o t l i b e l per se. Manley, s u p r a . A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e i n j u r i o u s c h a r a c t e r must b e a f a c t of s u c h common n o t o r i e t y a s t o be e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e g e n e r a l c o n s e n t of men s o t h a t t h e c o u r t t a k e s j u d i c i a l n o t i c e of it. G r i f f i n , s u p r a . The words " b u l l y boy" a r e of d o u b t f u l s i g n i f i c a n c e and t h e i r i n j u r i o u s c h a r a c t e r d o e s n o t a p p e a r on t h e i r f a c e . Defamatory words t o b e a c t i o n a b l e , a s ex- p o s i n g a p e r s o n t o h a t r e d contempt, r i d i c u l e o r obloquy o r which have a tendency t o i n j u r e him i n h i s o c c u p a t i o n must be o f s u c h a n a t u r e t h a t t h e c o u r t c a n presume a s a matter of law t h a t t h e y w i l l t e n d t o d i s g r a c e and d e g r a d e him o r c a u s e him t o be shunned and a v o i d e d . It i s not sufficient, s t a n d i n g a l o n e , t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e i s u n p l e a s a n t and annoys o r i r k s him, and s u b j e c t s him t o j e s t s o r b a n t e r , s o a s t o affect his feelings. Gang v . Hughes, (1953) I 1 1 F-Supp. 1 27, 29. T h i s C o u r t n o t e s t h a t " p o l i c e o f f i c e r s i n t h i s day p e r h a p s must be t h i c k - s k i n n e d and p r e p a r e d f o r a b u s e " . C o n c h i t o v . C i t y of T u l s a , 1392. (1974), 0kl.Cr. 521 P.2d 1384, J u s t i c e Powell i n Lewis v . C i t y of N e w O r l e a n s , ( 1 9 7 2 ) , 408 U.S. 913, 92 S.Ct. 2499, 33 L Ed 2d 321, remarked on t h e s u b j e c t of e p i t h e t s spoken t o p o l i c e o f f i c e r s s a y i n g t h a t t h o s e e p i t h e t s , had t h e y been a d d r e s s e d by one c i t i z e n t o a n o t h e r , f a c e t o f a c e and i n a h o s t i l e manner, would c l e a r l y have been f i g h t i n g words, i n h e r e n t l y l i k e l y t o provoke a v i o l e n t r e a c t i o n . T h i s remark w a s t a k e n o n e s t e p f u r t h e r by J u s t i c e Powell where i n h i s c o n c u r r i n g o p i n i o n t o L e w i s v . C i t y o f New O r l e a n s , ( 1 9 7 4 ) , 415 U.S. 130, 94 S.Ct. 970, 39 L Ed 2d 2 1 4 , 220, h e r e i t e r a t e d : " * * * a properly trained [police] o f f i c e r may r e a s o n a b l y b e e x p e c t e d t o ' e x e r c i s e a higher degree of r e s t r a i n t ' than t h e a v e r a g e c i t i z e n , and t h u s b e less l i k e l y t o respond b e l l i g e r e n t l y t o ' f i g h t i n g words.'* * * " P l a i n t i f f was a p o l i c e o f f i c e r and a p u b l i c o f f i c i a l . Due t o t h e n a t u r e o f h i s employment and s t a t u s , h e w a s s u b j e c t t o t h e v o c i f e r o u s comment by t h e p u b l i c . To t h i s f a c t , we must q u o t e t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t i n Cohen v. California, ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 403 U.S. 1 5 , 9 1 S.Ct. 1780, 29 L Ed " * * * Indeed, a s M r . J u s t i c e F r a n k f u r t e r h a s s a i d , ' [o] n e of t h e p r e r o g a t i v e s of American c i t i z e n s h i p i s t h e r i g h t t o c r i t i c i z e p u b l i c men and measures--and t h a t means n o t o n l y informed and r e s p o n s i b l e c r i t i c i s m b u t t h e freedom t o speak f o o l i s h l y and without moderation.' Baumgartner v . United S t a t e s , 322 U.S. 665, 673-674, 88 L.Ed. 1525, 1531, 64 S.Ct. 1 2 4 0 ( 1 9 4 4 ) . " I s s u e 2. The s t a t e m e n t s of September 1 6 , October 2 1 , and November 11, 1976, were n o t l i b e l o u s p e r s e . damages were p l e a d . No s p e c i a l No l i b e l p e r quod a c t i o n was p l e a d . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t was c o r r e c t i n g r a n t i n g a judgment on t h e p l e a d i n g s i n t h a t no m a t e r i a l i s s u e s remained once a d e t e r m i n a t i o n was made t h a t l i b e l p e r s e was n o t i n v o l v e d . S t e f f es, s u p r a . The judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s a f f i r m e d . W e Concur: Chief J u s t g c e
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
