Cassou v. Robbert
Cassou v. Robbert, 116 So. 714 (La. 1928).
Cited by
- Guillory v. Prairie Construction Co. 234 So. 2d 486 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
- Beard v. Wilson Wholesale Distributors, Inc. 215 So. 2d 664 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
- Anthon v. Knox 155 So. 2d 53 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
- Rives v. Starcke 196 So. 657 La. 1940
- Shepard Realty Co. v. United Shoe Stores Co. 190 So. 383 La. 1939
- Zimmer v. Caumont 187 So. 681 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1939
- Guccione v. New Jersey Ins. Co. of Newark, N. J. 167 So. 845 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
- Heard v. Heard. 149 So. 156 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
- Moore v. Oliphint 137 So. 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Darby v. Darby 120 La. 847
Opinion text
ROGERS, J. The defendant is sued as the indorser of a promissory note for $3,000, dated November 18, 1918, payable on demand, made by one Fernand Cavelier to his order, and by himself also indorsed. In the petition • it is alleged, among- other things, that in April, 1920, plaintiff sued defendant on the note, but discontinued the suit after exceptions had been filed thereto. The present action was instituted on M!arch 10, 1924. Defendant pleaded the prescription of five years. The court below maintained the plea, and dismissed the suit. Plaintiff has appealed. The judgment appealed from is correct. An action on a promissory note is prescribed by five years from its maturity. Civ. Code, art. 3540. Where a note is payable on demand, this prescription runs from the date of the note, and nót from the demand. Darby v. Darby, 120 La. 847 , 45 So. 747 , 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1208, 14 Ann. Cas. 805. A voluntary discontinuance of a prior suit on a note does not interrupt prescription. Civ. Code, art. 3519. For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed, at the cost of the appellant.