Majority
p. 996JOHNSON v. ISAACS et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. March 8, 1912.) Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, LAUGH-LIN, MILLER, and DOWLING, JJ.
Headnote
Libel and Slander (§ 7[1] )—Words Actionable—Imputation op Fraud.A charge that a person, with others, received money for the account of another, and “wrongfully disposed and converted the same to their own use,” is libelous per se.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Libel and Slander, Cent. Dig. §§ 17-78; Dec. Dig. § 7.*]
Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
Action by Charles E. H. Johnson against Lewis M. Isaacs and others. From an order granting the motion of defendant Stanley M. Isaacs for judgment on the pleadings, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed.
p. 997
John T. Fenlon and John V. Judge, for appellant.
Leo G. Rosenblatt, for respondent.
The only point in this case is whether it is libelous to charge that the plaintiff and others received money for the account of another, and “wrongfully disposed and converted the same to their own use.” While it is quite true that a technical conversion may not involve moral turpitude, we think there can be rio doubt that the average reader would understand the charge complained of to mean that an agent had appropriated his principal’s money to his own use, and it is. so plain that such a charge is libelous per se that it is idle to examine the cases of technical conversion cited by the respondent.
The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs. All concur.