10418 Precedential Processed

American Dist. Tel. Co. v. Rault

Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit · Filed November 27, 1979 · 378 So. 2d 194

Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., September 2, 1975 321 So. 2d 833; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., September 20, 1965 178 So. 2d 782

Cited by

Sessions & Fishman v. Liquid Air Corp. 616 So. 2d 1254 La. 1993
Designer's Gallery v. Hagen 611 So. 2d 737 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
Gulf States Asphalt v. BATON ROUGE SERV. 572 So. 2d 148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Concept 29 Uniform Service v. Roe 542 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
ROLL-LITE OVERHEAD DOORS, DIV. OF ARCHITECTURAL SPECIALTIES CO. v. Clover Contr., Inc. 527 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
IBEROAMERICANO ADVERTISING & PUB. CO. v. Schweikert 464 So. 2d 899 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
Jim McCary, Inc. v. Price 391 So. 2d 921 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
Buddy Patterson Gateway Gulf Service v. Howell 392 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980

Opinion text

378 So.2d 194 (1979) AMERICAN DISTRICT TELEGRAPH COMPANY v. Joseph M. RAULT, Jr. d/b/a the Rault Center. No. 10418. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit. November 27, 1979. Louise A. Ferrand, Hartel, Kenny & Dimitry, New Orleans, for plaintiff. Ford J. Dieth, Leach, Paysse & Baldwin, New Orleans, for defendant. Before SAMUEL, REDMANN and SCHOTT, JJ. REDMANN, Judge. The prima facie proof necessary under La.C.C.P. 1702 for a default judgment on a suit "on an open account" consists of the account itself, verified by a competent witness's affidavit (or testimony) of its correctness. In this case, neither affidavit nor testimony shows more than the competence of the *195 witness and the correctness of the amount claimed, and there is no copy of any account in the record nor any reference to the account (except for its balance) in the testimony. The general rule of La.C.C. 2277 is that "contracts or agreements, above five hundred dollars in value, must be proved at least by one credible witness, and other corroborating circumstances." The special rule of C.C.P. 1702 allows the credible witness to give (fundamentally hearsay) testimony by affidavit, and accepts the business record of the account itself (also fundamentally hearsay from salesclerks and bookkeepers) as corroboration. But the naked declaration of an employee that the balance of some unproduced account is correct does not constitute the prima facie proof required for a default judgment in a suit on an open account under C.C.P. 1702. Set aside; remanded.