Barrett v. Bullard
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL THOM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH DISTRICT FOR THE PARISH OF ST. LANDRY, THE JUDGE OF THE NINTH'PRESIDING; Western Dis; This is a redhibitory action. The plaintiff* alleges that in April, 1835, lie purchased the slave Titus front the defendant for the sum of $650, payable in a promissory note sigrted by James Walsh and endorsed by this petitioner.
Read the full summary
APPEAL THOM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH DISTRICT FOR THE PARISH OF ST. LANDRY, THE JUDGE OF THE NINTH'PRESIDING; Western Dis; This is a redhibitory action. The plaintiff* alleges that in April, 1835, lie purchased the slave Titus front the defendant for the sum of $650, payable in a promissory note sigrted by James Walsh and endorsed by this petitioner. That shortly after the sale he discovered the slave was afflicted with a severe ¿jsease 0f the kidneys, which must have existed at the time and before the sale; and which rendered him wholly -useless and worthless; being unable to perform any…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The defendant is appellant from a judgment by which the plaintiff has recovered the price of a slave which he bought of the defendant, on the ground of a redhibitory malady, called “ a chronic disease of the kidneys.”
A new trial was refused to the defendant and he appealed.
The evidence is so completely poised, that if the verdict of the jury had been against the plaintiff we should not have felt authorized to relieve him; as, it appears to us, he made that , ,, , ,, , . , . , . . . . hardly probable, which it was his duty to make certain. The new trial was in our opinion incorrectly refused :…
2Cited by4 opinions
- George v. KnoxSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1871
- Holcomb & Hoke Mfg. Co. v. TheodoraLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1925
- Mohana v. WoodallLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1953
- Blanton v. LudelingSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1878