Succession of Bagley

Citations

• 120 La. 922
• 45 So. 942
• 1908 La. LEXIS 591

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeal — Review—Questions op Fact.</p> <p>Where a person has been recognized by an administrator as a creditor of the succession he represents, and on the trial of an opposition to the claim on a .question of fact the district court sustains the claim, the Supreme Court will not reverse the judgment unless error in the judgment is clearly shown by the evidence.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 3, Appeal and Error, §§ 3955-3969.]</p> <p>2. Same.</p> <p>Where the issue in the lower court was as to whether the money deposited in a bank belongs to the depositor or to a third person, and the depositor swears positively that it belongs to him, a judgment rendered in favor on that issue will not be disturbed when his credibility is not impeached, and the attack upon the testimony is made through presumptions and deductions.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 3, Appeal and Error, §§ 3901-3906.]</p> <p>3. Evidence — Pabol Evidence — Admissibility.</p> <p>The parol evidence adduced to show that payment of the Scully note was not made by the maker, but by Grennan and out of his own money, is not parol evidence to contradict or vary the note. Dwight v. Linton, 3 Rob. 57;</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 20, Evidence, §§ 1799-1806, 2148.]</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>