Meyer v. Pritchett
Meyer v. Pritchett
Opinion of the Court
Defendants, A. C. Pritchett and Mrs. J. E. Pritchett, sued as maker and endorser, respectively, of a promissory note, appeal from a judgment condemning them as such. The extent of the relief which they seek to obtain on this appeal is to have the case remanded to the lower court.
I.
Both appellants urge as one of the reasons why there should be a remand, that the trial and submission of the case in the lower court occurred during the absence of their counsel and consequently without opportunity on their part to establish the defenses pleaded in their answers.
This state of facts would not have entitled the defendants to a continuance nor to (a new trial in the court below even if such relief had been formally and seasonably applied for.
Johnson vs. Deau, 48 An. 100; Cameron vs. Lane, 36 An. 716; Kohn vs. Short, 18 An, 291.
And much less do these facts disclose such exceptional conditions as would justify the exercise of our equitable power to remand for a new trial.
And, in this connection, a perusal of the answers of the defendants shows that a remand would serve no useful purpose, for the defenses therein pleaded involve an attempt not only to vary but to contradict by parol the terms -of the written instrument ¡sued upon, defenses which on technical grounds could not be established.
IL
The suit was against “Mrs. J. E. Pritchett,” she was
Such a defense has not been set up in the pleadings, though her marital status was known to her at the time and could have been readily ascertained by her counsel who was, or should have been put on inquiry by the fact itself that his client was sued, was cited and served, and answered as “Mrs. J. E. Pritchett.”
Moreover the same defect, namely the absence of her husband’s authorization, which she claims would vitiate, her endorsement and the lower court’s judgment, would equally destroy her present appeal which was likewise taken and perfected without such authorization.
At all events, whatever remedy exists for rectifying her failure to seasonably urge this defense below, we are satisfied that such remedy cannot be applied through the channel of appellate proceeding and that a remand of the case would be improper.
The defendants concede and the transcript discloses that the evidence adduced in the lower court fully supports the judgment and entitles the appellee to its affirmance. it is accordingly ordered that the judgment appealed from be affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.