Rousseau v. Lovering
This text of 7 La. Ann. 616 (Rousseau v. Lovering) 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
By the court:
The only question in this case is presented by a bill of exceptions. The action is on a note drawn by Lewis Lovering, in favor of John Hein or bearer.
Hein's endorsement is on the note. By this endorsement he became the endorser or surety of Lovering. Hein was offered as witness to prove facts which would have been a good defence to this action, but his testimony was objected to, on the ground of interest in the event of the suit. And the district judge sustained the objection, and refused to admit his testimony.
It is clear that that the judge did not err in his ruling on this point. Heih was directly interested in having the debt for which he was surety, extinguished. A surety is not a competent witness for his principal.
The judgment of the district court is therefore affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
7 La. Ann. 616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rousseau-v-lovering-la-1852.