Dyer & Stevenson v. Drew

14 La. Ann. 657
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedJuly 15, 1859
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 14 La. Ann. 657 (Dyer & Stevenson v. Drew) 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
Dyer & Stevenson v. Drew, 14 La. Ann. 657 (La. 1859).

Opinion

Cole, J.

This suit is instituted to recover of the defendant the' amount of two promissory notes, received for collection by Drew t& Bonner, as attorneys-at-law. The answer was a general denial.

There was judgment, as of nonsuit, against plaintiff, and he has appealed.

It is established, that a receipt was given for the notes by Drew & Bonner, and that the signature to the receipt is in the hand-writing of the defendant.

The defendant has not offered to return the notes, or to show what has become of them.

It was also incumbent on the defendant to establish that the failure to recover the amount of the notes was not owing to any laches on his part, but to the insolvency of the debtor. He has not proved these points.

A law partnership is an ordinary, and not a commercial one. O. 0. 2196, 5191. The partners are bound jointly and not in solido. C. C. 2843.

The objections to the authority of plaintiff to sue, and to the non-joinder of the heirs and representatives of Bonner to this suit, as co-defendants, come too late after an answer pleading the general denial.

The prescription of one year, for damages resulting from offences or quasi-offences, under Article 3501 oí the Civil Code, does not apply to this case.

As a written receipt was executed for the notes, this created a personal obligation, which is only prescribed by ten years. C. C. Art. 3508 ; Davis v. Houren, 10 R.,p. 403.

[658]*658■ It is objected, that plaintiff is obliged to show the genuineness of the notes, previous to recovery. It is for the defendant to produce them, and give plaintiff the opportunity of proving the signatures to the notes. The defendant is clearly liable for one-half of the notes for which the receipt was given.

■ It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be avoided and reversed, and that plaintiffs recover of the defendant four hundred dollars, with eight per cent, interest on one-half thereof, from the 29th of June, 1850, and on the other half from the 29th of June, 1851, and also the costs of both courts.

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

Related

Davis v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
427 So. 2d 921 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1983)
Jenkins v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
422 So. 2d 1109 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1982)
Alfonso v. McIntyre
387 So. 2d 1348 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1980)
Prophit v. McSween, Brook and Bolton
347 So. 2d 11 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1977)
Vessel v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.
276 So. 2d 874 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1973)
Toomer v. Breaux
146 So. 2d 723 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1962)
Succession of Zatarain
138 So. 2d 163 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1962)
Powe v. Morgan's La. & Tex. R. R. & S. S. Co.
7 La. App. 51 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1927)
Union Title Guarantee Co. v. Perkins
5 La. App. 389 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 La. Ann. 657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dyer-stevenson-v-drew-la-1859.