Flower v. Swift
This text of 5 Mart. (N.S.) 529 (Flower v. Swift) 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
delivered the opinion of the court. The defendant having received, in settling the estate of his testator, a note payable to the estate or order, endorsed it to the plaintiff, who, at maturity, caused the note to be protested: and having given due notice to the defendant, brought the present suit on the indorsement in the court of probates, of West Feliciana. The defendant pleaded in abatement [530]*530and to the merits. There was judgment in his favor, and the plaintiff appealed.
It is very clear that the suit was improperly brought in the court of probates. The debt, if any exist, is that of the defendant in his own right. He is sueable as the drawer of a new note, and the estate of his testator is by no means liable for it. Hence the court of probates was without jurisdiction.
It is therefore, ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that the judgment be affirmed, with costs in both cases.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
5 Mart. (N.S.) 529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flower-v-swift-la-1827.