Lee v. Rice
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an action on a promissory note. The plaintiffs style themselves in th'eir petition, George M. Lee and P. A. 'Hardy, and allege the defendants are indebted to them in the sum of five thousand dollars, on an endorsed promissory note, for which sum they pray judgment. The defendants pleaded a general denial, and require strict proof of the demand, and of the plaintiffs’ title to the note.
Read the full summary
Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an action on a promissory note. The plaintiffs style themselves in th'eir petition, George M. Lee and P. A. 'Hardy, and allege the defendants are indebted to them in the sum of five thousand dollars, on an endorsed promissory note, for which sum they pray judgment. The defendants pleaded a general denial, and require strict proof of the demand, and of the plaintiffs’ title to the note. These respondents further answering, say, “ that this suit should have been instituted in the full Christian names of the petitioners,…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The defendant, Rice, is appellant from a judgment on his promissory note; he pleaded the general issue, and that the plaintiffs had not set out their full Christian names. He required the plaintiffs to prove their title to the note. The plaintiffs in the petition are called George M. Lee and P. A. Hardy.
The Code of Practice, article 172, No. 1, requires, that the petition contain the name and surname of the plaintiff. In that under consideration, the plaintiff, Hardy’s surname is only given. We have only the initials P. A. instead of his other or Christian name., These letters may signify…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Thompson v. MichelliLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1932
- Davidson v. DavidsonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1940
- Moss v. JohnsonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1938
- Meyer v. Osoline Chemical Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1914