Court Opinion

ID: 8507995
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-23 08:08:32.961074+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:50:58.695457
License: Public Domain

Hosea, J.
Heard on motion to strike out.
So far as the innuendo, by the words “that the plaintiff had been guilty of acting the role of detective and of assisting a detective agency,” seeks to convey the idea that *481the article charges plaintiff with assisting a detective agency by assuming a part — that is, falsely impersonating a detective — it does not explain, but contradicts the article quoted. The article describes Dieckman as “of the Grannan Detective Agency,” which can only mean that he is a detective and a member of said agency.
Thomas L. Michie, for plaintiff.
Pogue & Pogue, for the motion.
The -office of the innuendo is to connect. the plaintiff with the article and to explain ambiguous terms. It can not be used to enlarge or prevent a meaning clearly expressed (8 Q. B., 825; 7 Q. B., 280).
The words ’ first above quoted must be stricken out as impertinent; and it is so ordered. Motion granted in part; denied in part.