Case Name: BABCOCK, GARDINER & CO. vs. WELLS ET AL.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1838-10
Citations: 12 La. 431
Docket Number: 
Parties: BABCOCK, GARDINER & CO. vs. WELLS ET AL.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 12
Pages: 431–431

Head Matter:
BABCOCK, GARDINER & CO. vs. WELLS ET AL.
Western Dist.
Oct. 1838.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, POR THE PARISH OP RAPIDES, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.
On the death of one of the co-plaintiffs after issue joined, and an order. being made contradictorily with defendants, to revive the suit in the name of the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff, so far as his interest was concerned: Held, that, service of the amended petition and citations, or notice on the defendants, are unnecessary; and no judgment by default is required to be taken.
ofone^fthe co-plaintiffs, afta-issuejoined, and an order being “riiy Cwit)ia<de-as his ’ interest ivas concerned: ffeid3 that ser-ded petitionTni' “Nu™’ t fendants, are unnecessary ; and no judgment by Juobetaken.11" fendants, to revive the suit in the name of the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased
This is an action by the plaintiffs* suing as a commercial firm, and after issue joined, one of them died. An order was made and the case remanded from this court, with directions to the court below not to proceed to trial, until the representatives of the deceased plaintiff, (Babcock,) should be made parties to the suit. See 10 Louisiana Reports, 397.
On the return of the case to the District Court, an amended petition was filed, setting forth the names of the heirs and legal representatives of Babcock, and the court proceeded to final judgment, without any further service of the amended petition, citation or notice to the defendants. Judgment being for the plaintiffs, the defendants appealed and assigned for error, the want of service of the amended petition and citation ; and that judgment by default was not taken.
Dunbar, for the appellants,
cited 5 Louisiana Reports, 361, in support of this case.
Winn, contra.

Opinion:
Bullard, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
, . lms case cannot be distinguished from that of the same plaintiffs vs. Williams, decided at the present term; and for the reasons given in the opinion of the court therein pronounced, the same judgment must follow.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed, with costs.