LeDuff v. Porche
Supreme Court of Louisiana
PPEAL from the District Court of Point Coupeé, Farrar, J. contended: We rely upon the following points: 1st. That the court erred in admitting proof of damages sustained by defendants, either for delay or otherwise, as it was not alleged nor proved that they put plaintiff in mora. See bill of exception. 2d.
Read the full summary
PPEAL from the District Court of Point Coupeé, Farrar, J. contended: We rely upon the following points: 1st. That the court erred in admitting proof of damages sustained by defendants, either for delay or otherwise, as it was not alleged nor proved that they put plaintiff in mora. See bill of exception. 2d. That defendants took upon themselves the risk of the work when the contract was made; and, besides, received it without objection when completed. 7th, R. R. 131. 3d, R. 06, R. 10. 3d, 2 R. 1. 3d. That the defendants did not suffer the damages alleged and claimed; that if they did, they…
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the court was pronounced by
Rost, J.
This is an action for work and labor done according to three distinct building contracts entered into, verbally, between the plaintiff and the defendants. There is no controversy before us about two of the contracts. The other was for the putting up of a set of sugar kettles and a chimney. The defendants allege that the work was completed too late, and that the kettles were so unskilfully put up that they could not be used, and had to be taken down and re-set during the grinding season; they claim damages in reconvention.
*150The case was tried…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Municipality No. 2 v. Orleans Cotton PressSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1841