Phelps v. Hodge
Supreme Court of Louisiana
from the District Court of Jefferson, Clark, J. The principal evidence in this case, was as follows: “ Received from the defendant, the sum of three hundred and sixty-nine dollars, in full satisfaction of the plaintiff’s demand; the plaintiff to pay costs. New Orleans, April 5th, 1848. ( Signed) R. M. Carter, Attorney for plaintiff.” “ Richard M. Carter, witness for defendant. Testimony taken by consent, subject to legal exceptions, except as to matters of form.
Read the full summary
from the District Court of Jefferson, Clark, J. The principal evidence in this case, was as follows: “ Received from the defendant, the sum of three hundred and sixty-nine dollars, in full satisfaction of the plaintiff’s demand; the plaintiff to pay costs. New Orleans, April 5th, 1848. ( Signed) R. M. Carter, Attorney for plaintiff.” “ Richard M. Carter, witness for defendant. Testimony taken by consent, subject to legal exceptions, except as to matters of form. Witness knows both parties to this suit. The plaintiff, defendant and witness, were interested in certain lands purchased of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The judges of the court delivered their opinions seriatim.
Pjreston, J.
The plaintiff having sued the defendant for upwards of $3000, the latter excepted, that the plaintiff having before sued for the same cause of action, he had paid JR. M. Carter, Esq., his attorney at law and duly authorized agent and attorney in fact, $369, in full satisfaction of the demand. He produces in evidence, a receipt of Mr. Carter, dated the 5th of April, 1848, headed with the title of the suit and the name of the court, for $369, in full satisfaction of the claim. It is signed by Carter, as attorney for the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Spies v. CarusoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1925
- Van Vleet Mansfield Drug Co. v. AndersLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1934