p. 546Catherine Broderick by Celestine Broderick, Her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. News Syndicate Co., Inc., Appellant. (Argued May 11, 1926; decided June 8, 1926.)
Headnote
Libel — evidence — testimony of increased mental distress by reason of acts and statements of members of plaintiff’s family after reading article — substantial rights of defendant not prejudiced by error.Broderick v. News Syndicate Co., Inc., 211 App. Div. 812 , affirmed.
Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered February 19, 1925, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action for libel. The question on appeal was whether the plaintiff in order to enhance the damages recoverable for injury to her feelings, could show that she suffered increased mental distress because of what the members of her family said and did in her presence after reading the publication complained of.
p. 547
Mac Donald De Witt for appellant.
John J. O’Leary and John F. Heffernan for respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs: Held: Errors, if any, presented by proper objection and exception did not prejudice the substantial rights of defendant.
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Caedozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Lehman, JJ. Absent: Andrews, J.