Gallot v. McCluskey
Supreme Court of Louisiana
k _fl_ PPEAL from the Second District Court of New Orleans, — This is a suit on contract of lease against Thos. McCluskey and Edward Reilly as his security in solido. Thei;e ryas judgment against both the defendants, -and Reilly alone has appealed. The lease is admitted, but the events of the war, causing a stagnation of business, is set up as a defence.' The Court, in its reasons for judgment, effectually answered this defence.
Read the full summary
k _fl_ PPEAL from the Second District Court of New Orleans, — This is a suit on contract of lease against Thos. McCluskey and Edward Reilly as his security in solido. Thei;e ryas judgment against both the defendants, -and Reilly alone has appealed. The lease is admitted, but the events of the war, causing a stagnation of business, is set up as a defence.' The Court, in its reasons for judgment, effectually answered this defence. A jury was refused, because of want of the necessary allegations and affidavit to warrant one under the provisions of Article 494 C. P., Amendment Acts of 1839, p.…
1Opinion of the CourtHowekd, J.
This is a suit on a notarial act of lease from plaintiff and his commercial firm of Demontrond & Co., to. McCluskey, as tenant, and E. Reilly his security, in solido. Judgment was rendered against McCluskey, after which Reilly filed an answer containing general and special defences, and a prayer for a jury. Upon a trial, the jury disagreed, and they were discharged. Subsequently, on plaintiff’s motion, the prayer for a jury was stricken from the answer, on the ground that the suit, having been brought on an unconditional obligation to pay a specific sum of money, the appellant did not make…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Borough of Carlisle v. Carlisle Gas & Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
3Cited by1 opinion
- Erdal v. ErdalLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1946