Cox v. Rees
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- Compagno (La. Ct. App. 1919)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The defendants and appellants complain that the district judge erred in stating the plaintiff’s claim, and striking the
The district judge rendered judgment against both defendants for the amount of the principal debt of fourteen hundred and ninety-eight dollars and fourteen cents, with interest, as stipulated in the mortgage, and for two hundred and one dollars and fifty cents, the balance of an account due by Reee alone to the plaintiff.
The defendant, Rees, has not shown that he is injured by the judgment. His co-defendant argues that he is improperly charged for the balance due by Rees on his private account, ag his-suretyship is confined to the sum stated in the mort-J r gage. He further urges that the balance of, the money rece^ve(^ by the plaintiff from the Consolidated Association Bank, on Rees’s check, after deducting the amount of the interest and costs on the original debt, should have been dnputéd to the principal of the mortgage debt, and not applied to the reduction of the private account of the plaintiff >Uíl3t xiees.
^ *s c^ear t^iat the defendant, Thomas, is not chargeable for the balance of this account.
payable.. The plaintiff, not being restrained' by any stipulation of either of the defendants as to the money received from the bank, except as to the interest on his claim,, had an undoubted right to apply it to the only debt of Rees, then due and payable. The mortgage debt, which Rees had a greater interest to pay, not being as yet payable, was entitled to no preference over a debt less onerous, which was then
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.