Beatty v. Tete
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the District Court of Assumption, Randall, 3. Defendant denies her personal responsibility, and claims that only the estate of her husband is responsible, on a note in this form. On this point we refer' to the following authorities: Balletic. Gaor, 3 M. 496; Russellv. Cast, 2 L. 188. The affidavit was insufficient, because made by the attorney — the absence of the party from the parish not being shown or suggested.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the District Court of Assumption, Randall, 3. Defendant denies her personal responsibility, and claims that only the estate of her husband is responsible, on a note in this form. On this point we refer' to the following authorities: Balletic. Gaor, 3 M. 496; Russellv. Cast, 2 L. 188. The affidavit was insufficient, because made by the attorney — the absence of the party from the parish not being shown or suggested. Paine v. Tourni, 2 E. 98; Penne Y. Tourné, 2 La. 677 : Lizardi v. Arthur, 16 L. 577. The court below erred in refusing a continuance to enable the defendants to procure…
1Opinion of the CourtVooRniES, J.
The defendant, Rose Clement, widow of Auguste Tete, deceased, is appellant from a judgment making her personally liable for the payment of three promissory notes signed by her as administratrix, payable to the order of, and endorsed by F. A. Tete, her co-defendant.
The defendant denies any such liability. She avers that the notes sued on were given, not as a novation, but as a liquidation and settlement of a debt originally due to the Union Bank by her said husband, of whose estate she is administratrix, the original debt having been previously evidenced by other notes with the same…
2Cited by1 opinion
- M. Kaplan & Son v. Louisiana Pulp & Paper Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1926