Kentgen & Co. v. Jordan

15 La. Ann. 219
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedApril 15, 1860
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 15 La. Ann. 219 (Kentgen & Co. v. Jordan) 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
Kentgen & Co. v. Jordan, 15 La. Ann. 219 (La. 1860).

Opinion

Duffel, J.

The defendant is appellant from a judgment by default made final.

[220]*220The default was confirmed on the presumption created by Article 3G0 of the Code of Practice, corroborated by the following- testimony : “ J. M. Wagner, for plaintiff, sworn, says : “ the account sued upon is correct.” Another witness was examined; but his testimony not having any reference to the account sued on, does not affect the decision of the cause.

The simple declaration, “ the account sued upon is correct,” was, in our opinion, insufficient to authorize the confirmation of the default; the witness should have given the reasons of his conclusion.

We will not, however, under the circumstances of the case, nonsuit the plaintiff, but we will remand the cause, in order to give him the benefit of his default.

It is, therefore, ordered, that the judgment of the District Courjxbe reversed, and that the suit be remanded to the Court a qua,, to bo proceeded in according to law; the appellee to pay the costs of the appeal.

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

Related

Carte Blanche Plumbing & Heating Repair Service, Inc. v. Van Haeler
337 So. 2d 654 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1976)
Electrical Supply Co. v. Moses
3 La. App. 286 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 La. Ann. 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kentgen-co-v-jordan-la-1860.