Case ID: la-ann_23/html/0549-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "IIowe, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 741.
    Zenon Broussard v. Joseph Breaux.
    Proving that a debtor made a payment on the day and dato that it is credited on his note is proving an acknowledgment of the debt.
    Parol ovidenco, offered to establish that he made the payment as credited on the note, is; therefore inadmissible after the maker has died and payment is sought to be enforced; against his succession. 21 An. 350.
    APPEAL from the Sixteenth Judicial District Court, parish of Lafayette. JDébaillon, Judge ad hoc.
    
    
      Poblano c& Perry, for plaintiff and appellee.
    If. PI. Girard, for defendant and appellant.
   IIowe, J.

In the case of Pavy v. Escoubas, lately decided, and in tho case of succession of Hillebrandt, 21 An. 350, we have had occasion to decide that a partial payment only interrupts the. current of prescription, because it is au implied acknowledgment of the debt, and that, under the statute of 1858, parol evidenco should not he admitted to prove such partial payment by a debtor since deceased. The plaintiff in this case contends with much earnestness that these decisions should he overruled, hut his arguments fail to satisfy tho court of the correctness of his position.

The defendant’s objection to such parol proof in this case should have been sustained.

The claim in suit is clearly prescribed, and it is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from he reversed, and that there he judgment for defendant, with costs of both courts.