Vicknair v. Southside Plantation Co.

10 Teiss. 43, 1913 La. App. LEXIS 6
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedFebruary 24, 1913
DocketNo. 5629
StatusPublished

This text of 10 Teiss. 43 (Vicknair v. Southside Plantation Co.) 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.

Bluebook
Vicknair v. Southside Plantation Co., 10 Teiss. 43, 1913 La. App. LEXIS 6 (La. Ct. App. 1913).

Opinions

His Honor,

JOHN ST. PAUL,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

Plaintiff claimed a balance due him for salary, alleging a contract of employment for a year and a discharge without cause before the end of the term.

Defendant filed an exception of “no cause of.action” based upon the omission of some alleged essential averment touching the contract; and pending action on this [44]*44exception plaintiff tendered and the Court allowed an amendment supplying the alleged omission.

We think the amendment was properly allowed. Amendments supplying mere omissions in pleadings may ;be allowed at any time before final'judgment on exceptions aimed thereat.

Reuther vs. Kansas City Milling Co., 2 Orleans Ct. of Appeal, 389.

Such amendments are clearly in furtherance of justice, since judgments based on exceptions of that nature constitute mere non-suits (8 Orleans Ct. App., 392), and do not end the controversy (119 La., 1064), which may always be renewed with the missing allegations supplied (47 An., 109).

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

Related

Railway Co. v. McCarthy
96 U.S. 258 (Supreme Court, 1878)
Succession of Herber
44 So. 888 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Teiss. 43, 1913 La. App. LEXIS 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vicknair-v-southside-plantation-co-lactapp-1913.