Lobdell v. Parker
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST DISTRICT. This was a redhibitory action to rescind a contract of sale of the machinery for a sugar mill, on account of defects which were alleged to have rendered it, unfit for the purposes intended. The defendant pleaded, first, prescription,- and secondly, that the mill was constructed to the best of his skill, and in the same manner that he did similar work for other customers.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST DISTRICT. This was a redhibitory action to rescind a contract of sale of the machinery for a sugar mill, on account of defects which were alleged to have rendered it, unfit for the purposes intended. The defendant pleaded, first, prescription,- and secondly, that the mill was constructed to the best of his skill, and in the same manner that he did similar work for other customers. As to the first ground of defence, the evidence showed, that in February, 1829, an agreement was made by the plaintiff’s agent with the defendant, that the latter should make and…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The rescission of the sale of a sugar mill, and damages on account of its total insufficiency, for the object for which it was intended, are asked; the pleas are prescription, the general issue, that the mill was constructed in the best manner the defendant could, and is equal to any he ever made for any of his customers.
The plaintiff had judgment and appealed, and has prayed that the judgment may be amended by adjudging him larger damages.
On the plea of prescription, the appellee’s counsel has urged, that redhibitory actions must be brought within one year from the date of the sale, Civil…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Jones v. GeorgeTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Breaux v. LairdSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1956
- Hunter v. MayfieldLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1958
- Bernin v. GuarinoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1921
- Ferguson v. RouseoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1920
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.