Legal Opinion

Peet v. Dougherty

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided March 15, 1844PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of East Feliciana, Johnson, J. cited Nott’s Executor v. Beard, 16 La. 308. Carlile v. Hold ship, 15 La, 375. Briggs v. Stafford, 14 La. 381. cited Chitty on Bills, 401. 1 Robinson, 83.

1Opinion of the CourtSmoN, J.

The plaintiffs seek to recover the amount of two promissory notes, each for the sum of $510 62, drawn by Dougherty &. McLanahan, and endorsed by ffm. D. Carter, and payable at the Clinton and Port Hudson Rail Road Bank, in Jackson. The issue, on the part of the endorser, is, that he is discharged by the laches of plaintiffs.

Judgment was first rendered against the drawers. Execution was issued thereon, and returned, “ No property found.” A subsequent judgment of nonsuit having been reudered in favor of the endorser, the plaintiffs have appealed.

The notary stated in the protests, “ that he went…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Briggs v. StaffordSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1840
  2. Nott's v. BeardSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1840
  3. Carlile v. HoldshipSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1840

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Macarty v. BureauSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1844
  2. Wright v. RogersSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1866

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API