Skip to main content
· 5/15/1900

Mequet v. Silverman

Citations

  • 52 La. Ann. 1369

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. Where a defendant is charged with having slandered the plaintiff, and liles a general denial, he is entitled to offer proof as to the language which he claims to have been actually used by him, and to show, if he can, that, as used, it imported no sinister meaning. And so, if the language imputed to the defendant is susceptible of an interpretation which would render it harmless, the defendant is entitled to offer proof, under the general denial, which would justify that interpretation.</p> <p>2. Where a person is charged with having passed a counterfeit bill upon another, and it appears, from other language, shown to have been used at the time, and from the surrounding circumstances, that it was meant to charge him with having passed such bill knowingly, and with intent to injure or defraud the person upon whom it was said to have been passed, and the charge, made and repeated in the presence of others, is shown to have been utterly without foundation, malice, upon the one hand, and injury, upon the other, will be presumed.</p> <p>3. In such a case, the plaintiff, being a boy of good character, past eighteen years of age, a verdict, in his favor, of one dollar, is worse than inadequate; it is equivocal, and will be increased.</p>

Judges: Monroe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.