Polo v. Natili
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Eastern Dist. APTEAL FROM THE CITY COURT '<3F NEW-ORLEANS. This is a suit againsl the maker and endorser of a promissory note, in which tjie plaintiffs had certain furniture sequestered in the hands of the defendants, on which they claim a privilege as vendors. The defendants pleaded a general denial.
Read the full summary
Eastern Dist. APTEAL FROM THE CITY COURT '<3F NEW-ORLEANS. This is a suit againsl the maker and endorser of a promissory note, in which tjie plaintiffs had certain furniture sequestered in the hands of the defendants, on which they claim a privilege as vendors. The defendants pleaded a general denial. The evidence shows that the plaintiffs sold a lot of furniture and rendered a bill of it to the defendants, amounting to six hundred and fifty dollars, for which they gave the note sued on. On the trial, evidence was offered to show this fact, which was Objected to. Interrogatories were…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The plaintiffs claim from the defendants, as maker and endorser of a promissory note, its amount, with privilege on certain articles of furniture sold to them. The general issue was pleaded, and judgment was given to the plaintiffs according to the prayer of the petition. Our attention is first drawn to a bill of exception, taken by the defendants, , ... , . . . to the admission of evidence of the note having been given for the price of the furniture, on which the privilege is asked, on the ground that the note was a novation of the debt contracted by the purchase of the furniture.
It does not…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Cabinet Makers Union v. SommersLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1884
- Carroll v. WallaceLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1881