Halliman v. Clark
Supreme Court of Louisiana
from the District Court of Madison, Selby, J. 1. An obligation in favor of a firm, or several persons jointly, cannot be sued for by any one member of the firm or payees, but the action must be instituted by all the members or payees; and a judgment rendered in their joint name or firm, at the suit of any one or any part of them, would be no bar- to a suit by the whole firm for the same cause, or of the other partners for then- shares.
Read the full summary
from the District Court of Madison, Selby, J. 1. An obligation in favor of a firm, or several persons jointly, cannot be sued for by any one member of the firm or payees, but the action must be instituted by all the members or payees; and a judgment rendered in their joint name or firm, at the suit of any one or any part of them, would be no bar- to a suit by the whole firm for the same cause, or of the other partners for then- shares. Tucker v. Lile, 4 La. 328. 10 La. 432. 13 La. 484. IB La. 31. 9 Rob. 149,
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the court was pronounced by
Kino, J.
Clark executed an obligation in favor of McReynolds, Halliman Sf Co., a firm composed of McReynolds, Halliman and Riley, for the payment of the price of constructing a levée, and the defendant Downes became the guarantor of Clark for the performance of the obligation. Upon this contract Halliman and the administrator of McReynolds instituted the present action to enforce payment. The defendants excepted to the petition for the want of proper parties, averring that Riley should have been joined in the action. An amended petition was thereupon…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Crozier v. HodgeSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1832