Legal Opinion

Goldsmith v. Parsons

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided February 4, 1935No. 33187Published

1Opinion

In our original opinion in this matter we reversed the Court of Appeal, for the sole reason that in its opinion it ruled out parol evidence to show the true consideration that induced the defendant to give the note sued on, i.e., the verbal agreement topay a less amount than the face value of the note, plaintiff having inherited it from Goldsmith and, therefore, subject to the equities between the maker and the payee. We remanded the case to the Court of Appeal in order that it might consider and pass upon the parol evidence offered by the defendant touching on the verbal agreement between…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Loranger v. Citizens' Nat. BankSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1927
  2. Brewer v. New Orleans Land Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1923
  3. Dickson v. FordSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1886
  4. Bowen v. Waxelbaum & BrotherCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  5. Reimers v. HebertLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1927

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API