Skip to main content
· 12/14/1908

Richard v. Charlot

Citations

  • 122 La. 492
  • 47 So. 841
  • 1908 La. LEXIS 490

Syllabus

<p>Estoppel (§ 75*) — Evidence (§ 434*) — Equitable Estoppel — Clothing Another with Apparent Ownership — Parol Evidence Affecting Writings — Mortgages.</p> <p>Plaintiff, appearing as vendor in an act of sale of real estate to defendant, the price thereof being represented by negotiable notes secured by mortgage (on the property transferred) to the order of, and indorsed in blank by, the purchaser, placed the notes in the possession of and under the control of the maker in order to borrow money thereon. He did so, the notes in question being used as collateral. The lender acted in good faith and in ignorance of any fact affecting the validity of the notes or mortgage. Needing more money, it was agreed that the original notes' should be canceled and the mortgage securing them be erased, and other negotiable notes secured by a new mortgage be executed by the maker. The original notes were obtained from the lender, and placed in the hands of a third person to obtain the erasure of the mortgage. This being done, new notes secured by special mortgage were executed by the maker of the original notes, and given to the lender on a larger loan made by him. Plaintiff brings emit to be replaced in her original position to have the cancellation and surrender of the original notes and the erasure of the same declared null and void, on the ground that all of these acts were acts fraudulent and without her authority or consent, done by the maker of the motes. There was no written evidence that plaintiff had authorized or consented to the action taken, but that she had done so was (over ‘her objection) established by parol evidence. Held that, having placed the negotiable mortgage notes in the possession of and under the ■control of the maker with all indicia of rights tof full ownership, she committed herself to and ■was bound by all acts of his dealing with respect to the notes and mortgage with third parties acting in good faith, relying upon the situation as legal. Held,. that

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding an evidentiary hearing “to determine the appropriate manner of calculating the value of Plaintiffs investments” before determining CoinMarketCap was a reliable source to convert cryptocurrency into USD

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nicholls

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.