Derbigny v. Mondelli
Supreme Court of Louisiana
ATTEAL FROM THE CITY COURT OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is an action on a promissory note, signed by “ Mondelli & Reynolds.” The plaintiff prays judgment, in solido, against the defendants; and for all general and equitable relief. Mondelli alone answered. He admitted the signature of the firm, but denied his liability, in solido ; his firm being a particular partnership. On these pleadings and issues the cause was tried.
Read the full summary
ATTEAL FROM THE CITY COURT OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is an action on a promissory note, signed by “ Mondelli & Reynolds.” The plaintiff prays judgment, in solido, against the defendants; and for all general and equitable relief. Mondelli alone answered. He admitted the signature of the firm, but denied his liability, in solido ; his firm being a particular partnership. On these pleadings and issues the cause was tried. The evidence showed that Mondelli signed the name of the partnership firm to the note sued on ; which was admitted .to be a particular partnership. It further appeared, the note was…
1Opinion of the CourtSimon, J.
This case is now before us on a rehearing. We have carefully revised our former decision, and after a renewed investigation of the points of fact and of law, submitted to our reconsideration, we have come to a different conclusion.
Plaintiff, as holder of a promissory note made to his order, signed “ Mondelli & Reynolds,” alleges, that the defendants are bound, in solido, for the payment of said note, and prays judgment accordingly; he also prays for general relief. Mondelli alone having been cited, filed an answer, in which, after admitting the signature, he denies his liability, in solido;…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Jamison v. Charles F. Cullom & Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1903
- Rudy v. HardingSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1843
- Louisiana Mutual Insurance v. WaltersSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1873