Grigsby Const. Co. v. Colly

Citations

• 124 La. 1071
• 50 So. 855
• 1909 La. LEXIS 592

Syllabus

<p>1. Account, Action on (§ 7*) — Evidence.</p> <p>Amount claimed, balance on open account, is due plaintiff.</p> <p>2. Attachment (§ 63*) — Ownership of Property — Transfer.</p> <p>The writ of attachment took nothing. It was not proven that the property attached belonged- to defendant.</p> <p>3. Principal aNd Agent (§ 101*) — Contracts —Alteration—Authority of Agent.</p> <p>The reconventional demand of defendant was not sustained by sufficient testimony. He failed in the attempt at proving that his contract with the company was changed. The alleged agent, by whom it was stated that the change in contract was made, was not the agent of plaintiff.</p> <p>4. Fraudulent Conveyances (§ 299*) — Transfer of Personal Property — Sales.</p> <p>The testimony did not satisfy the court that the property seized was defendant’s.</p> <p>5. Determination of Cause on Appeal.</p> <p>Judgment on main demand — open account— affirmed.</p> <p>Judgment annulled as relates to reconventional demand.</p> <p>Affirmed as relates to interveners.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p> <p>6. Attachment (§ 30*) — Grounds.</p> <p>Where defendant, a railroad subcontractor largely indebted to plaintiff, was on the eve of his departure for Texas, where he proposed to reside permanently, having practically completed his work for plaintiff and started to work for another company, promising to pay his indebtedness, which promises he failed to keep, and had stated to plaintiff’s manager that he was going to take his outfit to Texas on a rice farm, there were sufficient grounds for attachment.</p> <p>Monroe and Provosty, JJ., dissenting.</p>