North Rampart Lumber & Supply Co. v. Huppenbauer
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtJanvier, J.
Defendant Huppenbauer ; was a contractor engaged in the construction of buildings. Defendant Pisciotta en- : tered into a contract with Huppenbauer, - for the construction by Huppenbauer of cer- ■ tain work. The contract was not in writing, was not recorded, and no bond was required.
The contractor had for some time made purchases of material from plaintiff. On March 30, 1926, he owed a balance of $603.34, and, at the request of plaintiff, executed notes for that amount. The notes were not paid at maturity, and this suit is the result.
So far as Huppenbauer is concerned, there is no defense,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Madison Lumber Co. v. BacheminLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1928
3Cited by2 opinions
- Triple I Supply, Inc. v. Sunset Rail, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1982
- Adams v. DarbyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1951