Case Name: HINKLE v. ALEXANDER
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1966-03-09
Citations: 244 Or. 267
Docket Number: 
Parties: HINKLE v. ALEXANDER
Judges: Before McAllister, Chief Justice, and Perry, Sloan, Denecke and Lusk, Justices.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 244
Pages: 267–281

Head Matter:
Argued February 2,
affirmed March 9,
petition for rehearing allowed April 12, rehearing June 7, reversed August 12, 1966
HINKLE v. ALEXANDER
411 P. 2d 829
417 P. 2d 586
John C. Anicker, Oregon City, argued the cause for appellant. On the brief were Jack, Goodwin & Anicker, Oregon City.
George L. Hibbard, Oregon City, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Hibbard, Jacobs, Caldwell & Kincart, Oregon City.
Before McAllister, Chief Justice, and Perry, Sloan, Denecke and Lusk, Justices.

Opinion:
SLOAN, J.
This was a libel action. A jury returned a verdict for plaintiff. The court allowed a motion for judgment n.o.v. Plaintiff appeals.
Defendant operated a restaurant, plus sleeping facilities, in Estacada which was primarily patronized by loggers working in the area. Frequently he would allow credit to his customers if the employer of the particular customer would agree to pay the bill. Plaintiff was a contract logger. One of plaintiff's employees obtained credit from defendant and failed to pay. Plaintiff had not previously agreed to pay the bill of this employee. Defendant sought payment of plaintiff and plaintiff refused. Defendant then posted a notice in his place of business which contained the unpaid bill with the words "Wayne Hinkle owes this to us" written on the face of the bill. This is the claimed libel.
On this appeal plaintiff's only argument is that the words were actionable per se. This case is, therefore, governed by Hudson v. Pioneer Service Co., 1959, 218 Or 561, 346 P2d 123, where it was held that publication of non-payment of a debt, except within circumstances not presented here, is not libelous per se.
Affirmed.