Vicknair v. Southside Plantation Co.
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., June 29, 1962 143 So. 2d 262; La., November 15, 1875 27 La. 687; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., March 8, 1974 286 So. 2d 706
Vicknair v. Southside Plantation Co., 10 Teiss. 43 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1913).
Opinion text
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 exception 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).