Case Name: Richard T. Eastin vs. Alfred Dupèrier
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1876-06
Citations: 28 La. Ann. 634
Docket Number: No. 831
Parties: Richard T. Eastin vs. Alfred Dupèrier.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 634–635

Head Matter:
No. 831.
Richard T. Eastin vs. Alfred Dupèrier.
On a settlement between Duperier and bis ward, Ratier, Duperier, being indebted to Ratier, assumed, in part payment ol this indebtedness, to pay a note drawn by his ward and on which ho had gone security.
Duperier and Ratier were sued on this pote. Pending this suit, Ratier sold whatever claim he might have a ;ainst Duperier to plaintiff. Judgment was rendered iá'favor of Duperier and Ratier on the note sued on. Plaintiff, as the transferee of Ratier, sues Duperier for the amount of this note.
The settlement between Ratier and Duperier being final in their relations of tutor and ward, Ratier, when he sold his rights against Duperier to plaintiff, sold nothing.
Because Duperier was not condemned to pay the note which he agreed to pay is no reason why Ratier, or his alleged transferee, should claim payment of the sum which it represented, any more than if the holder of the note had given it to him, or if the payment thereof had been barred by prescription.
APPEAL from the Third. Judicial District Court, parish of Iberia. Train, J.
Gary & Fournet, for plaintiff and appellant.
J. A. Breaux and A. C. Dumartrait, for defendant and appellee.

Opinion:
Ludeling, C. J.
The plaintiff alleges that he purchased from one Ratier, the former ward of the defendant, whatever balance might be due by the defendant to said ward. He alleges, further, that in the rendition of his account to his ward the defendant acknowledged an indebtedness to him, which was satisfied by money, by notes which said defendant held against his said ward, and by notes on which he was bound as security for his said ward; that one of these last-named notes, for $833 33, was declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be without consideration, and that for the amount of said notes the said defendant is still indebted to the said ward, or to petitioner, his vendee.
There was judgment of nonsuit, and plaintiff has appealed.
It appears from the record that subsequent to the judgment in favor of Eatier and Duperier on the note for $833 33, Eatier sued his former tutor for matters connected with his tutorship, and there was judgment in reconvention against Eatier for $120. It may be that by not claiming in that suit the sum now claimed in this suit, he is estopped from suing on it afterward. The pleadings have been negligently made, and we think the ends of justice will be subserved by affirming the judgment of nonsuit.
It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from bo affirmed with costs.