Case Name: Frederick Goll, Plaintiff, v. John H. Delesderniers et al., Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1899-03
Citations: 26 Misc. 549
Docket Number: 
Parties: Frederick Goll, Plaintiff, v. John H. Delesderniers et al., Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 26
Pages: 549–550

Head Matter:
Frederick Goll, Plaintiff, v. John H. Delesderniers et al., Defendants.
(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,
March, 1899.)
Libel — Statement that a business man has had “ one or more unsatisfactory fires ”.
The words “ Our home offices have called our attention to the fact that the assured has had one or more unsatisfactory fires ” are not libelous when written of a business man, as they do not naturally import any crime, nor do they import a dishonesty of action so derogatory to his character or standing in business as to make them actionable.
Demubbeb to complaint.
W. Bennett Marx, for plaintiff. ■
Michael H. Cardozo and Raymond Reubenstein, for defendants.

Opinion:
Russell, J.
Demurrer to complaint. Are these words written of a business man libelous? Viz.: " Our home offices have called our attention to the fact that the assured has had one or more unsatisfactory fires."
The ordinary import of the language is not changed by the averment of any extrinsic facts or circumstances which would give it any other than its ordinary significance. Presumably the readers of the letter would derive the same meaning from the words used as would ordinary persons, whatever uncertainty was left in the mind as to what was really meant. It will not answer to merely surmise that the writer intended to convey a charge which was libelous, if the mind of the reader would not naturally arrive at such a conclusion.
It would be inferred from these words that the fires were unsatisfactory to some one concerned in their occurrence. If that person were the plaintiff no libel is charged, for the words would import a loss to him. If the want of satisfaction was on the part of the insurance companies we might easily infer, without recourse to the reflection that all fires are unsatisfactory to insurance companies where losses are sustained, that those insurance companies were not- satisfied with the ratio of premium for the hazard to the loss incurred, the proof of damage or from doubts arising upon the information furnished as to any violation of the terms of the policy, or carelessness attendant upon the circumstances of the fire. There are so many occasions, naturally possible on the part of the insurance companies, for honest dissatisfaction with the incidents attending the insurance, the fire and the proofs of loss, that the words used do not, in the absence of a special direction otherwise, import naturally any crime, or such a dishonesty of action on the part of the plaintiff as to make them so derogatory to his character or standing as a business man that they constitute :a libel as recognized by law. Demurrer sustained, with leave to amend on payment of costs.
Demurrer sustained.