Case Name: COIT & CO. vs. CHARBONNET ET AL.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1841-05
Citations: 18 La. 440
Docket Number: 
Parties: COIT & CO. vs. CHARBONNET ET AL.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 18
Pages: 440–441

Head Matter:
COIT & CO. vs. CHARBONNET ET AL.
AVPEA.il Flioar TUB COIOrERCIAE COURT OF NETT OREEANS.
The defendants, sued as endorsers, failed in proving their defence, and judgment against them was affirmed.
This is an action against the endorsers of a’promissory note for $1610, signed by C. Parlange.
The defendants severed in their answers, hut admitted their signatures and pleaded novation; averring the plaintiffs had received goods and a new note for' the original debt.
On the trial evidence was offered to prove the maker' of the rióte had sent $900 worth of drilling and a note for $1000, endorsed by Materre, in lieu of and to take up the note sued oti. The plaintiffs’ witnesses proved that this' arrangement ñever took effect; the drilling and note offered, were' not accepted or received by the plaintiffs.
Títere was judgment for the plaintiffs and the defendants appealed1.
L. Peirce, for the plaintiffs.
Pepin, contra.

Opinion:
Martin, J.
delivered the opinion of thé court.
The defendants, sued as endorsers of a promissory note, severed in their answers, admitted their signatures as endorsers, and pleaded novation. There was judgment against them and they appealed. ^
The case has been submitted to us without an argument. A close examination of the evidence has satisfied us that the Judge of the Commercial Court did not err in concluding that the defendants had failed in establishing their defence.
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the Commercial Court be affirmed wdth costs.