Accusing a Person of Being a Thief Slander Cases In Mississippi

In 1917, the Mississippi Supreme Court determined that "accusing a person of being a thief is actionable per se." Valley Dry Goods Co. v. Buford, 114 Miss. 414, 427, 75 So. 252, 254 (1917). The Mississippi Supreme Court again affirmed this decision that "thief" is slander per se in Boler v. Mosby, 352 So. 2d 1320, 1323 (Miss. 1977). "With reference to the common law action for slander we have held that it is sufficient to charge the words which constitute the slander by using the exact words or by using synonymous words, and that accusing a person of being a thief is actionable per se." Id. (citing Valley Dry Goods Co., 114 Miss. at 427, 75 So. at 254). Other jurisdictions which have discussed the exact term "thief" found this assertion is slander per se. "Falsely calling someone a . . . 'thief' . . . falls within the parameters of slander per se . . . ." Bennett v. Computer Assocs. Int'l, Inc., 932 S.W.2d 197, 200 (Tex. Ct. App. 1996). See also K-Mart Corp. v. Washington, 109 Nev. 1180, 866 P.2d 274, 283 (Nev. 1993); Barlow v. International Harvester Co., 95 Idaho 881, 522 P.2d 1102, 1112 (Idaho 1974); Hayes v. Smith, 832 P.2d 1022, 1025 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991); Mains v. K Mart Corp., 297 S.C. 142, 375 S.E.2d 311, 314 (S.C. Ct. App. 1988); Agnew v. Hiatt, 466 N.E.2d 781, 783 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984); Bobenhausen v. Cassat Ave. Mobile Homes, Inc., 344 So. 2d 279, 281 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977).