## Facts

- A newspaper published allegedly willful, malicious, and defamatory statements about a married woman.
- The statements were alleged to be libelous and actionable per se as to the wife.
- The wife allegedly suffered mental distress upon learning of the publication, which then resulted in physical illness and incapacity.
- The wife’s illness allegedly caused her to be unable to provide domestic services and consortium to her husband.
- The husband sued to recover the pecuniary value of the lost services and consortium, treating the claim as derivative of the wrong done to the wife.

## Issues

1. Whether a husband states a cause of action for loss of his wife’s services and consortium when a defendant’s libel (actionable per se) against the wife allegedly causes mental distress that results in physical illness disabling her from providing services.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals held the complaint stated a valid cause of action.
- The court affirmed the order overruling the defendant’s demurrer, allowing the husband’s claim to proceed.
- The court accepted, at the pleading stage, that mental distress leading to physical illness could be a legally sufficient causal chain for a derivative loss-of-services claim when the underlying publication is actionable per se and alleged to be willful and malicious.

## Legal Principles

- Libel actionable per se supports recovery by the defamed person for compensatory damages, including mental suffering and resulting physical harm.
- A spouse may maintain a derivative action for the pecuniary loss of services and consortium proximately caused by a tortious injury to the other spouse.
- For intentional or willful torts, liability may extend to natural and probable consequences, even if harm develops through an intervening mental-to-physical sequence, so long as the resulting illness is not legally too remote.
- A derivative loss-of-services claim in this setting is limited to pecuniary loss tied to the spouse’s physical incapacity, and depends on proof of causation from the actionable wrong to the disabling illness.

## Conclusion

The court permitted a husband to pursue damages for the loss of his wife’s services and consortium where an actionable-per-se, willful, and malicious libel against the wife allegedly caused mental distress that resulted in physical illness disabling her from rendering services, rejecting remoteness objections at the pleading stage.


Garrison v. Sun Printing & Publ'g Ass'n, 207 N.Y. 1, 100 N.E. 430 (N.Y. 1912)