Sanders v. Mitchell
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
hAMY, Judge.
The plaintiff sued the defendants for non-payment of a check. The trial court entered a default judgment against the defendants. The defendants then filed a motion for new trial, which was denied. Accordingly, the defendants appealed. For the following reasons, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and render.
*1277Factual and Procedural Background
The defendants, Irma and Ernest Mitchell, contracted with the plaintiff, Clarence Sanders, to construct their home. In payment for work that had been rendered, the Mitchells paid Mr. Sanders with a check in the amount of $16,000.00. The check…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Capo v. BlanchardLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1924
- Taylor v. DowdenLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1990
- American Bank of Welch v. Smith Aviation, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1983
- CHRISTIANA & CO. v. Matt's Grocery, Inc., No. 2Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1996
- Sangid v. FlemingLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Redden v. RipleyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2003