Case Name: Alfred Marchand v. H. T. Coffee and Wallace & Co.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1871-05
Citations: 23 La. Ann. 442
Docket Number: No. 2025
Parties: Alfred Marchand v. H. T. Coffee and Wallace & Co.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 23
Pages: 442–444

Head Matter:
No. 2025.
Alfred Marchand v. H. T. Coffee and Wallace & Co.
Jn a. suit against the maker and indorser of a promissory note, the note of evidence of the clerk of the court below must show, in order to bind the indorser, that the certificate of notice to the indorser was offered separately from that of the note and protest. Therefore if the note of the evidence only shows that the note and protest were offered, the indorser can not be held, even though the certificate of notice be attached to the act of protest and the entire document be annexed to the petition. An indorser can only be bound by evidence offered at the trial to show his liability, and he is never in fault for not making objection to the reception of evidence until such testimony is offered as will fix his liability if unrebutted.
APPEAL from tlie Seventh District Court, parish of Orleans.
Oollens, J. Hornor <£ Benedict, for plaintiff and appellee.
H. D. ■Ogden, for defendants and appellants.

Opinion:
Taliaferro, J.
The defendants are sued, the one as drawer and the others as indorsers of a promissory note for the sum of two thousand dollars. The defendants, Wallace & Co., called in warranty, D. G-. Cook, who in his answer excepts to the call on the ground that Wallace & Co. do not pretend that the respondent ever had any dealings with them, or that he ever entered into any contract with them in relation to the note sued on, or ever assumed the payment of their obligation thereon as indorsers.
Judgment was rendered as prayed for and tlie defendants have appealed.
We see no force in the defense. The indorsers introduced no evidence of any kind to show liabilityresting on Cook in relation to the note.
It is ordered that the judgment of the district court be affirmed •with costs, and tliat the plaintiff recover one' hundred and fifty dollars from.' the defendants, Wallace & Co., as damages for a frivolous appeal, and that they pay the costs of this appeal.