Court Opinion

ID: 9829970
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:45:52.977951+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:03:25.732398
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
The only question presented in appellant’s motion for rehearing which was not considered in the original disposition of the case refers to a paragraph of the court’s charge in which the court permitted the jury to consider publications made in the Beaumont Enterprise as a basis of liability. It is claimed that there were no allegations in the plaintiff’s original petition which justified the submission of those publications as a ground of recovery. A more careful perusal of the petition has convinced us that the objection is not well taken. While in the main that instrument specifies in detail other characters of publication of the offensive documents, there are sufficient general allegations concerning the publications to include those specified in the charge. Moreover, this objection is not tenable because it is raised for the first time in the motion for a rehearing. It does not appear that it was called to the attention of the trial court or of this court in the original submission of the case.
The motion is overruled.