Dupre v. Richard
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Appeal from the District Court of St. Landry, Boyce, J. Where a note is so drawn as not to bind the makers, it will be liable to the same objection on the part of the endorser. 3 Mart. N. S. 637.
1Opinion of the CourtSimon, J.
This suit is brought against the endorser of a promissory note, duly protested at maturity, drawn and executed in the name of Desessarts, Martel & Co. His defence is, that the drawer of said note, or the person who signed it in the name of the firm, was not authorised to do so. That the note *498was subscribed by Alexander Desessarts, who had, at the time, no authority to bind his co-partners, the partnership of I^eses-sarts, Martel & Co., being, at that time, dissolved, and Balthazar Martel, one of the firm, the only person who had a right to terminate the business of the partnership.
Judgment…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lachomette v. ThomasSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1843
- Nott & Co. v. DoumingSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1834
- Olivier v. AndrySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1835
3Cited by1 opinion
- Crane v. TrudeauSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1867