Dudley Jenkins v. D X Sunray Oil Company

Fifth Circuit

Dudley Jenkins v. D X Sunray Oil Company

297 F.2d 244

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 9, 1962

Docket18949

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 297 F.2d 244 (Dudley Jenkins v. D X Sunray Oil Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dudley Jenkins v. D X Sunray Oil Company, 297 F.2d 244 (5th Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this action in the nature of a suit for damages for injury to public and private character and defamation of character the absence of any affidavit or other proof by the appellant, the plaintiff below, that the statement contained in the letter written by the appellee was untrue or that it was written with malice, required the granting by the trial court of the appellee’s motion for summary judgment. Under the law of Louisiana, truth is a defense in such a suit. LSA-R.S. 13:3602. Pool v. Gaudin, 209 La. 218, 24 So.2d 383. Even though the defense of truth were not available, the communication here complained of was a privileged communication and would thus entitle the appellant to the defense of privilege. See LSA-R.S. 14:49. The appellant cites us to no Louisiana cases which would warrant a finding by the trial court that there remained in this case a substantial issue of fact which, if decided in favor of the appellant, would entitle him to a judgment. The judgment is

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

In this action in the nature of a suit for damages for injury to public and private character and defamation of character the absence of any affidavit or other proof by the appellant, the plaintiff below, that the statement contained in the letter written by the appellee was untrue or that it was written with malice, required the granting by the trial court of the appellee’s motion for summary judgment. Under the law of Louisiana, truth is a defense in such a suit. LSA-R.S. 13:3602. Pool v. Gaudin, 209 La. 218, 24 So.2d 383. Even though the defense of truth were not available, the communication here complained of was a privileged communication and would thus entitle the appellant to the defense of privilege. See LSA-R.S. 14:49. The appellant cites us to no Louisiana cases which would warrant a finding by the trial court that there remained in this case a substantial issue of fact which, if decided in favor of the appellant, would entitle him to a judgment. The judgment is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

297 F.2d 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dudley-jenkins-v-d-x-sunray-oil-company-ca5-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack