Williams v. Rutherford Freight Lines, Inc., 10 N.C. App. 384

Summary

The North Carolina Court of Appeals held that statements characterizing plaintiffs as “gangsters” in the context of a labor dispute were actionable only per quod, requiring pleading and proof of special pecuniary damages. The court further held that emotional distress and mental suffering were insufficient special damages, and that later supplemental pleadings could not relate back where no actionable damages existed when the original complaints were filed and the limitation period had expired. The judgments were affirmed.

Holdings

1. Calling plaintiffs "gangsters" did not charge them with a specific punishable crime and therefore was not actionable per se.
2. The alleged characterization of plaintiffs as "gangsters" was not actionable per se as an impeachment of their business or occupation.
3. When allegedly false statements are actionable only per quod, the plaintiff must plead and prove special damages, and special damages mean pecuniary loss rather than humiliation or emotional suffering.
4. The later pleadings could not relate back to the original complaints because the plaintiffs had no actionable special damages when the suits were instituted and the claims did not become actionable within the applicable limitations period.
5. The statute of limitations barred the claims because the alleged statements were made in April 1963, the applicable slander limitations period was six months, and the alleged special damages occurred only after that period had expired.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendants' alleged characterization of plaintiffs as "gangsters" was actionable per se because it charged plaintiffs with a crime.
2. Whether the alleged statements were actionable per se as an impeachment of plaintiffs' trade or occupation.
3. Whether emotional distress and mental suffering constituted special damages for defamation actionable only per quod.
4. Whether special damages first alleged in later pleadings could relate back to the original complaints under North Carolina Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c).
5. Whether a defamation action actionable only upon the occurrence of special damage may be maintained when no actionable special damage existed when the action was instituted and the damage occurred after the limitations period expired.

Disposition

affirmed