Case Name: McGEHEE v. INSURANCE CO. OF NORTH AMERICA
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1902-01-07
Citations: 112 F. 853
Docket Number: No. 1,036
Parties: McGEHEE v. INSURANCE CO. OF NORTH AMERICA.
Judges: Before PARDEE, McCORMICK, and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 112
Pages: 853–855

Head Matter:
McGEHEE v. INSURANCE CO. OF NORTH AMERICA.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
January 7, 1902.)
No. 1,036.
Libel—Privileged Communications—Allegations in Pleadings.
Allegations in a defendant’s pleading imputing criminal or fraudulent acts to the plaintiff, where relevant and pertinent as matters of defense, —such as allegations charging the plaintiff in an action on a fire insurance policy with having intentionally burned the insured property, or with having fraudulently overstated its value in his proofs of loss,— are absolutely privileged, and cannot be made the ground of an action for libel.
McCormick, Circuit Judge, dissenting, holds that the effect of the privilege is merely to relieve the publication from the implication of malice, and cast the burden of proving express malice on the plaintiff.
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
J. E. Pierson, for plaintiff in error.
Chas. P. Fenner and E. B. Krjittschnitt, for defendant in error. •
Before PARDEE, McCORMICK, and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The suit of John S. McGehee v. The Insurance Company of North America, No. 12,008, of the docket of the circuit court of the United States, Eastern district of Louisiana, was brought to recover on a fire insurance policy. The allegations in the answer filed in that suit, to the effect that the plaintiff had intentionally burned or procured to be burned the property, goods, and effects claimed to have been lost, and. that in the proofs of loss the plaintiff had grossly and fraudulently overestimated their value, whereby the policy had been avoided, were relevant and pertinent as matters of defense, and are absolutely privileged. See Townsh. Sland. & L. § 221; Folkard's, Starkie, Sland. § 196; Odgers, Lib. & Sland. p. 141; Wilson v. Sullivan, 81 Ga. 238, 7 S. E. 274; Gains v. Insurance Co. (Ky.) 47 S. W. 884; Abbott v. Bank (Wash.) 56 Pac. 376; Sherwood v. Powell (Minn.) 63 N. W. 1103, 29 L. R. A. 153, 53 Am. St. Rep. 614; Jones v. Brownlee (Mo.) 61 S. W. 795, 53 L. R. A. 445; Johnson v. Brown, 13 W. Va. 119; Shelfer v. Gooding, 47 N. C. 181; Gardemal v. McWilliams, 43 La. Ann. 457, 9 South. 106, 26 Am. St. Rep. 195.
- The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.