Case ID: la_15/html/0046-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Bullard, J.,\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MOONEY vs. CORCORAN.
    Eastern Dist.
    
      March, 1840.
    APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD DISTRICT, FOR THE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.
    The amount of a judgment having been paid, the defendant therein took an appeal and had it reversed: Held, that he should recover back the sum paid, on showing these facts.
    This is an action to recover back the sum of three hundred and twenty dollars, which the plaintiff alleges he paid to the defendant as the amount of a judgment and costs, which the latter had obtained against him in the District Court, but which was afterwards reversed on a devolutive appeal.
    There was a plea admitting the judgment, but denying that it was ever paid by the plaintiff as he alleges.
    The plaintiff made out his case by proof, and had judgment, from which the defendant appealed.
    
      Avery and- Fowler, for the plaintiff.
    
      T. G. Morgan, contra.
   Bullard, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This case turns altogether on questions of fact. The plaintiff sued to recover back a sum of three hundred and twenty dollars, which he had paid under a judgment rendered against him by the District Court, and which was afterwards reversed on appeal. The defendant’s plea that there was a compromise by which the plaintiff obtained a release of that much of the judgment, and that, in fact, he did not pay the whole amount, appears to us as it did to the court below, not sustained by the evidence.

The judgment of the District Court is, therefore, affirmed with costs.