Erwin v. Carlisle
This text of 36 La. Ann. 270 (Erwin v. Carlisle) 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.
Opinion
Tlie opinion of the Court was delivered by
This is a suit for levee work done by plaintiffs under contract with defendant.
The answer admits the contract, but denies that the work contracted for had been completed or that the amount of work claimed in the petition had been done, or that proper credits had been allowed for advances and supplies.
The evidence adduced by plaintiffs fully establishes the claim in every particular to the extent allowed by the judgment.
The defendant offers no evidence except:
1. A document purporting to be the estimate of W. H. Mitchell, signing as United States Engineer, which was objected to on the ground that the document was not proved either as to signature or capacity, and objection sustained.
2. A document purporting to be a copy of a letter alleged to be from Erwin & Riley to one Gordon; objected to on the ground that the original letter is the best evidence, and objection sustained.
3. An account of defendant against Erwin & Riley, which was admitted to the extent of the debits shown to have been admitted by plaintiffs.
Defendant excepted to these rulings of the court, but they are mani festly correct.
The defense is thus left without any support.
Judgment affirmed at appellant’s cost.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
36 La. Ann. 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/erwin-v-carlisle-la-1884.