Hermann v. Union Bank of Louisiana
Hermann v. Union Bank of Louisiana
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiffs seek; to make the defendants responsible for the amount of a bill of exchange and three promissory notes deposited with them for collection, on the allegation that due diligence was not exercised by the latter. The defendants pleaded the general issue, and averred that if the plaintiffs sustained any loss in regard to the above bill and notes, it resulted from the delays and irregularities of the mail, for which the defendants cannot be held responsible. The plaintiffs had judgment for the aggregate amount of the bill and notes, with legal interest from the day on which they ought to have been respectively protested, with costs. The defendants appealed. The case is before us on a point which does not appear to have received the consideration of the first judge. ■The plaintiffs sue in their own names, but allege that they deposited the bill and notes, as agents of J. L. & S. Joseph & Co., of New
It is therefore ordered that the judgment be reversed, and that ours be for the defendants, with costs in both courts.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.