M'Gary v. President of Lafayette
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Appeal from the District Court of the First District, Buchanan, J. contended, that the judgment should be reversed on the ground that the damages were excessive, as the whole amount of injury sustained, admitting the defendants to have acted illegally, could not exceed two or three hundred dollars. urged, that the judgment should be maintained. The damages were properly allowed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the First District, Buchanan, J. contended, that the judgment should be reversed on the ground that the damages were excessive, as the whole amount of injury sustained, admitting the defendants to have acted illegally, could not exceed two or three hundred dollars. urged, that the judgment should be maintained. The damages were properly allowed. In an action against a wrong-doer for aggravated injuries, the amount allowed as damages should not be restricted to the aetual loss. In the case of Carlin v. Stewart, 2 La. 76, the court said: “ In actions for…
1Dissent
Bullard, X,
dissenting. My opinion is, that the judgment first pronounced should remain undisturbed.
We all agree, I believe, that the merits of the case are clearly with the plaintiff, and that she is entitled to some damages. The only difficulty is as to the quantum, or, in other words, whether the damages given by the jury, and sanctioned by the court below, are excessive.
After the plaintiff’s house had been demolished, the Corporation, by their attorney, justified the act of their Chief Magistrate. They answered, that they had done nothing, and intended to do nothing, except what may be…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Rowan v. Shapard, Stevens & Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1884
- Mo. Pac. R'y Co. v. HewettCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1884
- Banks v. BranderSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1839
- Betterton, Irvine & Co. v. BuckCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1884