B. Silvernagle & Co. v. East

Supreme Court of Louisiana

B. Silvernagle & Co. v. East

21 La. Ann. 261

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedApril 15, 1869

DocketNo. 2116

StatusPublished

This text of 21 La. Ann. 261 (B. Silvernagle & Co. v. East) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

B. Silvernagle & Co. v. East, 21 La. Ann. 261 (La. 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

Wyly, J.

Defendant has appealed from a judgment against him as administrator of the succession of William anti Mary Sandle, on two promissory notes — one due on first November, 1861, and the other due seventeenth May, 1862.

The defense is a general denial and the prescription of five years. This suit was instituted after the prescription of five years had accrued on each of the notes; There' is no renunciation or interruption of prescription proved.

Plaintiffs have without avail attempted to avoid the consequences of prescription by proving that judicial proceedings could not be instituted on account of the rebellion- Tlie plea of prescription is well taken. C. C. 3505 ; Rabel v. Pourcian, 20 A. 132; Smith v. Stewart, lately decided.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be avoided and annulled, and that this suit be dismissed at plaintiffs’ costs in both courts.

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

Wyly, J.

Defendant has appealed from a judgment against him as administrator of the succession of William anti Mary Sandle, on two promissory notes — one due on first November, 1861, and the other due seventeenth May, 1862.

The defense is a general denial and the prescription of five years. This suit was instituted after the prescription of five years had accrued on each of the notes; There' is no renunciation or interruption of prescription proved.

Plaintiffs have without avail attempted to avoid the consequences of prescription by proving that judicial proceedings could not be instituted on account of the rebellion- Tlie plea of prescription is well taken. C. C. 3505 ; Rabel v. Pourcian, 20 A. 132; Smith v. Stewart, lately decided.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be avoided and annulled, and that this suit be dismissed at plaintiffs’ costs in both courts.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 La. Ann. 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/b-silvernagle-co-v-east-la-1869.