Vizetelly v. Mudie’s Select Library, Ltd.
Court of Appeal
2 Q.B. 170 (1900)
- Written by Sarah Hoffman, JD
Facts
A book was published that contained defamatory statements about Vizetelly (plaintiff). Vizetelly sued for libel, and a settlement was reached. As part of the settlement, the publisher of the book agreed to attempt to withdraw the libel from circulation by offering to replace the relevant pages in all copies of the book. The publisher issued public notices to that effect. Mudie’s Select Library, Ltd. (Mudie’s) (defendant) was a store that sold and loaned out books, and it had several copies of the libelous book. The proprietors of Mudie’s continued to sell and loan out the libelous book after the public notices. Vizetelly filed suit against Mudie’s for libel. At trial one of the proprietors of Mudie’s testified that they were not aware of the libel, the previous court case, or the offer to replace the pages. The proprietor further testified that he and the other employees of Mudie’s did not read every book offered in the store and that they had not read the relevant book. The jury found for and awarded a judgment to Vizetelly. Mudie’s filed a motion for judgement or new trial. The trial court denied the motion, and Mudie’s appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Romer, J.)
Concurrence (Williams, J.)
Concurrence (Smith, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
