Case ID: la_13/html/0286-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Rost, J-,\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BURNS VS. SCHAUMBERG.
    APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OP
    The amicable demand is admitted, by the failure of the defendant to answer an interrogatory put to him, to that effect.
    This is an action against the defendant, as endorser of a promissory note. Suit was first instituted before the City Court of New-Orleans, in which the plaintiff had judgment, and the defendant appealed to the Parish Court for the parish of New-Orleans. On the trial in the first instance, the defendant insisted on his exception, that the plaintiff had brought another suit on this same note, which is still pending, and the costs unpaid, in consequence of which he was precluded from prosecuting the present one. The plaintiff produced witnesses to prove that he had paid the costs in the previous suit, which was objected to by defendant’s counsel, but the testimony was received and he took his bill of exceptions.
    The parish judge was of opinion the plaintiff had made out his case, by proving protest and due notice to the defendant of the non-payment of the note. Judgment was given against him, and he appealed to this court.
    
      Randall, for the appellee.
    
      Bartlett, for the defendant and appellant.
   Rost, J-,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant is sued as endorser of a promissory note, and the petition contains the usual averments of protest and notice.

The defendant admitted the execution of the note, but denied the ownership of the plaintiff, and alleged that no amicable demand had been made. The amicable demand is admitted by the failure of the defendant to answer the interrogatory put to him to that effect. The protest and notice are proved, and we see nothing in the bills of exception taken by the defendant’s counsel, which can avail him. The payment of the costs in a previous suit, could be proved by witnesses. The judgment rendered against him in the Parish Court, must be affirmed. ,

It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the Parish Court be affirmed with costs.