Conrad v. Burbank

25 La. Ann. 112
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedFebruary 15, 1873
DocketNo. 2705
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 25 La. Ann. 112 (Conrad v. Burbank) 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
Conrad v. Burbank, 25 La. Ann. 112 (La. 1873).

Opinion

Howell, J.

Plaintiffs sued defendant for a certain sum as rents of premises owned in common by the parties. Defendant admitted ¡indebtedness of a part of the claim and set up payments, expenses and ■commissions as an offset to the balance. Judgment was rendered for the amount acknowledged (see 24 An. 17), and the contest now relates •to the balance. The admission by plaintiffs of the account furnished by the defendant was conditional, and it devolves on the latter to •establish its correctness.

[113]*113Claiming to be a joint owner of the property, he must show an agreement to charge commissions for recovering rents and keeping the premises in repair. This he has not done. Nor can he charge plaintiffs with the premiums on insurance, as it is shown that the insurance covered only his own interest. The items then of his account for commissions and premiums must be rejected.

Of other disbursements the only proof in the record is of the following, to wit: Haller’s bill $57 75; Craft’s bill $32 70; J. G-. Lewis’ bill $115; City taxes $225; State taxes (two items) $94 75, making a total <of $525 20 established by evidence.

The agrégate amount of collections was $4362 97; deduct from this the above sum, leaves $3837 77 to be divided. Plaintiffs’ half is $1918 88; of this they recéived $1355 61 under the former decree, which leaves $563 27 still due them by defendant.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be reversed, and that plaintiffs recover of defendant the sum of $563 27 with legal interest from judicial demand, and costs in both courts.

Rehearing reiused.

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

Related

Succession of Vazquez
976 So. 2d 209 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)
Succession of Rosenthal
369 So. 2d 166 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1979)
Beavers v. Stephens
341 So. 2d 1278 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1977)
Keller v. Thompson
121 So. 2d 575 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1960)
Carbajal v. Bickmann
187 So. 53 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1939)
Murphy v. Murphy
66 So. 382 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1914)
Interstate Land Co. v. Doyle
52 So. 991 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1910)
Sharp v. Zeller
38 So. 449 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 La. Ann. 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conrad-v-burbank-la-1873.