Case Name: Nalle & Cammack vs. Horace L. Dufour
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1880
Citations: 1 Mann. Unrep. Cas. 377
Docket Number: No. 7220
Parties: Nalle & Cammack vs. Horace L. Dufour.
Judges: Spencer, J., adheres to his dissent, and White, J., who was appointed in the interim between the two hearings, concurred with Spencer, J.
Reporter: Unreported cases heard and determined by the Supreme Court of Louisiana, from January 8, 1877, to April, 1880
Volume: 1
Pages: 377–378

Head Matter:
No. 7220.
Nalle & Cammack vs. Horace L. Dufour.
The endorser of a note, which was made and endorsed expressly to be used as collateral security for advances and supplies to a planter under a stipulation that the debt thus incurred should not exceed a given, sum, will not be responsible for any excess over that sum. His responsibility is for the difference between the proceeds of crops and the sum stipulated as the maximum of debt to be incurred.
The endorser of anote thus made, that remains in the hands of the factors who furnished the supplies, is but a surety, and his liability cannot be extended beyond his surety-ship.
Appeal from the Sixth District Court of New Orleans. Rightor, J.
Hunton and J. Brewer for Plaintiffs Appellants. Huntington and Oapdeville for Defendant.
The plaintiffs agreed to supply Generes, a sugar planter, to the amount of $3,000 and no more. He gave a pledge of his crops of the most stringent kind to secm-e them, and besides obtained Dufour’s endorsement of his note for $2,000 which he gave the plaintiffs as collateral. The note was endorsed by Dufour with knowledge of the contract, and of the use to be made of it. The plaintiffs advanced over $7,000 and the crops sold for $4,500. This suit is to recover the amount of the note endorsed by Dufour.

Opinion:
De Blanc, J.
The additional advances made were contrary to and inconsistent with the contract, by which alone Dufour was bound.