Southern Chemical & Fertilizing Co. v. Wolf
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Théard, J. “ It is alleged that on the seventh day of February, 1895, the •defendants did compose and publish a certain false, malicious, ■defamatory and libelous matter concerning the plaintiff and its business, the said publication being in the form of a letter directed to Dr, Samuel R. Olliphant, President of the Board of Health, and being in the words and figures, to wit : •“ ‘B. J. Wolf & Sons, 26, 28, 80,…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Théard, J. “ It is alleged that on the seventh day of February, 1895, the •defendants did compose and publish a certain false, malicious, ■defamatory and libelous matter concerning the plaintiff and its business, the said publication being in the form of a letter directed to Dr, Samuel R. Olliphant, President of the Board of Health, and being in the words and figures, to wit : •“ ‘B. J. Wolf & Sons, 26, 28, 80, 32 and 34 Bienville Street. “ ‘New Obleans, February 7, 1895. •“ ‘ Dr. Samuel R. Olliphant, President of the Board of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinon of the court was delivered by
Nicholls, C. J.
Plaintiffs contend that for the purposes of a decision upon the exceptions all the allegations of their petition are to be taken for true.
Plaintiffs in their petition have pleaded part of the evidence upon which they would rely in the event of a trial on the merits, and announced in some places conclusions of law. These particular portions of the petition we do not consider as falling under the rule invoked, that on the trial of an exception of no cause of action, the allegations of the petition are to be taken for true.
We need not enter…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Maes v. New Orleans Police BoardLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1927
- State v. Hackley, Hume & JoyceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1909
- Trahan v. Broussard Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1910