Womack v. Sternberg
Supreme Court of Louisiana
1DissentHawthorne, Justice
I disagree with the views expressed in the majority opinion for the determination of the quantum of damages on the remand of this case.
First I cannot agree that it was error for the Court of Appeal to treat the exchange transaction as two sales. That is the recognized theory of exchange in the civil law.
Article 2667 of the Civil Code, which concerns the exchange contract, provides:
«- sK H= *
“And in this * * * contract each of the parties is individually considered both as vendor and vendee.”' (Italics mine.)
Pothier in his treatise on the contract of sale describes exchange as follows:
“The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Vincent v. Morgan's Louisiana & T. R. & S. S. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1917
- McCoy v. Arkansas Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1932
- Burrows v. PeirceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1851
- Tulane Educational Fund's Adm'es v. Baccich & De MontluzinSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1911