Legal Opinion
McMasters v. Mather
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Decided June 15, 1849PublishedCited by 5 opinions
from the Fourth District Court of New Orleans, Strawbridge, J. This was an action on a note dated and payable in New Orleans.
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the court was pronounced by
Shtieli, J.
We think the plea of prescription was properly maintained. See Hatch v. Gilmore, 3 An., 508. Duncan v. Ford. Tyson v. McGill, 15 La. 145. The case of Boyle v. Mann, ante p. 170, is not in point. There the evidence was considered as authorizing the inference of a dishonest purpose, and that the debtor had departed from the United States with the avowed purpose of baffling his creditors. Besides, Mather appears to have lived in Mississippi from the date of the note to a period of five years subsequent to its maturity, and the plaintiff was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tyson v. M'GillSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1840
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cullota v. WashingtonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1927
- Gaillardanne v. LocascioLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1936
- Davis v. ColvinLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1982
- Zimmer v. CaumontLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1939
- Blocker v. PlaisanceLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1944