Smith v. Merchants' Mutual Insurance
This text of 1 Gunby 16 (Smith v. Merchants' Mutual Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Where plaintiff in injunction swears “ to the best of his knowledge,” the affidavit is not invalidated by the omission of the words “ and belief.” 5 An. 558; 13 An. 88. There are no sacramental words in our system of practice.
2. Where there is a final judgment, neither the authority to compromise it nor the compromise itself, need be in writing, C. C. 2997; 21 An. 477. Art. 3071, C. C., relates to the settlement of a pending litigation or the prevention of an anticipated suit.
3. But the authority to compromise must be express and special, i. e., given to a particular person for that particular purpose.
4. The original judgment creditor authorized his attorney to compromise the judgment at his discretion — but he subsequently, to the knowledge of his attorney and the debtor, transferred the judgment; held : No compromise made after the transfer is binding on the transferree, nor will a payment made by the debtor to the attorney for the purpose of compromise be credited on the judgment. 6 An.
5. Where plaintiff in injunction is partially successful, no damages will be allowed on dissolution of the injunction.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Gunby 16, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-merchants-mutual-insurance-lactapp-1885.