Houston River Canal Co. v. Kopke

Citations

• 106 La. 609

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. Where persons hold themselves ont, and allow themselves to be held out, as partners, to the public at large and to particular individuals, who, accordingly, deal with them in the belief that they are partners, they should be held liable as partners for all the purposes of such dealings.</p> <p>2. The obligation of the clerks of the District Court, to issue subpoenas for witnesses upon the demands of the defendants in civil actions, is not ■ affected by Article 472 of the Code of Practice. The matter is controlled by Act No. 203, of 1898, under which the clerks must look to the plaintiffs in such actions for their costs, and must issue such subpoenas as the defendants may require without exacting payment or security.</p> <p>3. An irrigation company may be put in default, with respect to the water which it has contracted to furnish, by a verbal demand made by one member of a planting partnership in the presence of two other members; or, by a written demand, left at the camp of its “water boss,” in the hands of a responsible person, during the absence of such boss.</p> <p>4. Such company, in order to recover rental for water claimed to have been furnished under contract, must prove the contract, and the service in accordance therewith, and, where it is claimed that there was a partial performance, accepted by the lessees, any pro tanto recovery must be proportioned to definitely established benefits derived therefrom by the lessee, after deducting damages resulting from failure to perform in- full. If the benefit cannot be clearly so established there can be no recovery.</p>