Fabacher v. Rouprich

107 So. 295, 160 La. 433, 1926 La. LEXIS 2379
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedFebruary 1, 1926
DocketNo. 25463.
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 107 So. 295 (Fabacher v. Rouprich) 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
Fabacher v. Rouprich, 107 So. 295, 160 La. 433, 1926 La. LEXIS 2379 (La. 1926).

Opinion

O’NIELL,

C. J.

This is a suit on a promissory note given by the defendants, Mrs. B. Rouprich and her two sons, in part payment for a herd of cows that they bought from the plaintiff. He has appealed from a judgment rejecting his demand and dismissing the suit. Mrs. Rouprich was a married woman, and the two sons were minors when they signed the note. She was not authorized by her husband, ánd they were not emancipated. Plaintiff knew, when he accepted the note, that Mrs. Rouprich was married, and that her sons were both minors. He does not dispute that the judgment in favor of the two sons is correct. The theory on which he seeks to hold Mrs. Rouprich liable on the note was that she was a public merchant when she signed the note. -The proof is that she was not a public merchant, or in any business whatever, for that matter. It seems to be conceded that the debt was not her separate debt, or one for which she might have bound herself without being authorized by her husband.

Appellees have answered the appeal and asked for damages for the dissolution of a writ of sequestration that was issued in the case. The writ was dissolved merely as an incident of the decision of the case on its merits. In such case attorneys’ fees are not allowed for dissolving a conservatory writ.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Willis v. Mills Tooke Properties
42 So. 2d 548 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1949)
Hebert v. Hurwitz Mintz Furniture Co.
21 So. 2d 638 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1945)
Roper v. Brooks
9 So. 2d 497 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1941)
Finance Security Co. v. Mexic
188 So. 657 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1939)
Esmele v. Violet Trapping Co.
175 So. 471 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1937)
Louisiana State Rice Milling Co. v. Potter
153 So. 690 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1934)
Socola Rice Mill Co. v. Gitz
116 So. 407 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1928)
Louisiana Farm Bureau Cotton Growers Cooperative Ass'n v. Martin
6 La. App. 736 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1927)
Smith v. Wm. D. Keith Motors Co.
111 So. 798 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 So. 295, 160 La. 433, 1926 La. LEXIS 2379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fabacher-v-rouprich-la-1926.