Case Name: BANK OF LOUISIANA vs. MANSKER ET AL.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1840-03
Citations: 15 La. 115
Docket Number: 
Parties: BANK OF LOUISIANA vs. MANSKER ET AL.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 15
Pages: 115–116

Head Matter:
BANK OF LOUISIANA vs. MANSKER ET AL.
Eastern Dist.
March, 1840.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD DISTRICT, FOR THE PARISH OP EAST BATON ROUGE.
Notice of protest “delivered at the store of the defendants,” without stating with whom, is sufficient to bind them as endorsers.
This is an action against the maker and endorsers of a promissory note.
‘The endorsers .pleaded a general denial, and alone made defence.
The note sued on was regularly protested, and the notary certifies that he “ delivered notice of protest at the store of Mansker & Dewey, (the endorsers) in the town of Baton Rouge.”
On the trial, when the protest and certificate of the service of notice were offered in evidence, the defendants, by their counsel, objected to them, on the ground that the protest purports to be a copy of the original on file, whereas the law only makes a copy from the record evidence; and that the notice is insufficient. The papers were received, and the defendant’s counsel excepted. But the district judge was of opinion there was not sufficient service of notice of protest to bind the endorsers; and non-suited the plaintiff, who appealed.
Brunot, for the plaintiff and appellant.
T. G. Morgan, contra.

Opinion:
Martin, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The defendants are sued as endorsers of a promissory note. They had judgment of non-suit in their favor, and the plaintiff appealed.
The only question which this case presents, relates to the service of notice of protest. The notary certifies that he "delivered the notices at the store of the defendants" in the town of Baton Rouge.
It is urged that this service was irregular and insufficient, because it is not shown that there was personal service made oa die defendants ; or that the notice was left with a proper person so as to bind them as endorsers. r
This case cannot be distinguished from that of the Commercial Bank against Gove, just decided; ante, 113. The notice was, therefore, regular and sufficient.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of non-suit be annulled and reversed. And it is further ordered and decreed, that the plaintiff recover from the defendants, James Mansker'and Oran Dewey, in solido, the sum of six hundred dollars with five per cent, per annum interest, from the 6th day of April, 1839, until paid; and four dollars and fifty cents the cost of protest; and also the costs of suit in both courts.