DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Madison v. Bolton, 102 So. 2d 433.

69 citing documents.

  • Heft v. Burk 302 So. 2d 59 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
    (1958), is illustrative of the law applicable to the case at hand.
  • Fleming v. Michot 295 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
  • Mitchell v. Truck Service, Inc. 286 So. 2d 112 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1973
    For a , : "In a general and comprehensive sense, libel is the defamation of a person by the publication of any false and unprivileged writing which tends to expose him to contempt, hatred, ridicule or obloquy; or which causes him to be shunned or avoided; or which has a tendency to deprive him of the benefits
  • Brown v. News-World Publishing Corp. 245 So. 2d 430 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971
  • Russo v. Kelly 228 So. 2d 736 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    12 , (1960); , (1958).” In the Sciortino case, this court at p. 362, held: “ * * * in view of the fact that all parties to this sale were aware of a court order to partition the property in question, we are compelled to conclude that all parties to this act were attempting to divest Regina Sciortino of her interest i
  • Greenberg v. Burglass 216 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
    (1958); Kennedy v. Item Co., Inc., 213 La.
  • Sas Jaworsky v. Padfield 211 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1968
    App. 1st Cir. 1957); , (1958); Deshotel v. Thistlethwaite, 240 La.
  • Mailhos v. Osbon 201 So. 2d 108 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    (1958): “In a general and comprehensive sense, libel is the defamation of a person by the publication of any false and unprivileged writing which tends to expose him to contempt, hatred, ridicule or obloquy ; or which causes him to be shunned or avoided; or which has a tendency to deprive him of the be
  • Cormier v. Blake 198 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
  • Parsons v. Gulf & South American Steamship Co. 194 So. 2d 456 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1967
  • Thompson v. St. Amant 196 So. 2d 255 La. 1967
  • Walker v. Associated Press 191 So. 2d 727 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1966
    Madison v. Bolton , , and the extensive authorities therein cited.
  • Dyer v. Davis 189 So. 2d 678 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
    Kennedy v. Item Co., 213 La.
  • Matassa v. Bel 164 So. 2d 332 La. 1964
    he facts, truly stated, warrant the imputation.” And for the publication to enjoy a qualified privilege, the statement must be prepared bona fide, with the view to preventing or punishing some public abuse, in which case it is considered as justified as a duty owed to society, providing it does not “meet the objection of having been made maliciously and without probable cause.” , , and the extensive authorities therein cited.
  • Matassa v. Bel 156 So. 2d 250 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
    12 , ; , ; Kennedy v. Item Co., 213 La.
  • Mertz v. Sauvageau 154 So. 2d 515 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
    In our own jurisprudence, , , where the rule regarding malice in such matters was stated as follows: “[I]t falls within the class of qualified privileged communications where the occasion on which it was made rebuts the inference prima facie arising from a statement prejudicial to the character or reputation of plaintiff, and put
  • Miller, Smith and Champagne v. Capital City Press 142 So. 2d 462 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    Deshotel v. Thistlethwaite, 240 La.
  • Oakes v. Alexander 135 So. 2d 513 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
  • Deshotel v. Thistlethwaite 121 So. 2d 222 La. 1960
    13:3602; , , and numerous cases there cited.