Dent v. Balch
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
In actions for slander of title, special damage of a pecuniary nature is the gist of the action, and such damage must be directly and particularly set out in the complaint; an allegation of loss in general terms not being sufficient. Ebersole v. Fields, 181 Ala. 421, 62 So. 73.
But this rule does not mean that the amount of the loss, in each of the particulars in respect of which special damage is claimed, must be separately stated. The amount of the loss is a matter of proof, and is immaterial so far as the statement of a cause of action is concerned.
We think the complaint in this case…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Burkett v. GriffithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Kendall v. . StoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
- Ebersole v. FieldsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
- Paull v. HalfertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
3Cited by10 opinions
- Fowler v. Curtis Publishing Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
- Garver v. Public Service Company of New MexicoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
- Reaugh v. McCollum Exploration Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1942
- Weir v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Womack v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.