means defense in Louisiana

2011Article 921 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure states that “[a]n exception is a means of defense ... used by the defendant.” 2 Leger v. Weinstein, 03-1497, pp. 9-10 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/27/04), 885 So.2d 701, 707 , writ denied, 04-2903 (La.2/4/05), 893 So.2d 873 , and writ denied, 04-2899 (La.2/4/05), 893 So.2d 882 .

2011Article 921 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure states that “[a]n exception is a means of defense ... used by the defendant.” 2 Leger v. Weinstein, 03-1497, pp. 9-10 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/27/04), 885 So.2d 701, 707 , writ denied, 04-2903 (La.2/4/05), 893 So.2d 873 , and writ denied, 04-2899 (La.2/4/05), 893 So.2d 882 .

2011Article 921 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure states that “[a]n exception is a means of defense ... used by the defendant.” 2 Leger v. Weinstein, 03-1497, pp. 9-10 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/27/04), 885 So.2d 701, 707 , writ denied, 04-2903 (La.2/4/05), 893 So.2d 873 , and writ denied, 04-2899 (La.2/4/05), 893 So.2d 882 .

2009With the finding of ratification, we need not consider the issue of indirect reference to an unrecorded instrument, as discussed in Julius Gindi & Sons, supra, and Judice-Henry-May Agency v. Franklin, supra. The judgment rejecting Means’s claim to evict Comcast is affirmed.

2009With the finding of ratification, we need not consider the issue of indirect reference to an unrecorded instrument, as discussed in Julius Gindi & Sons, supra, and Judice-Henry-May Agency v. Franklin, supra. The judgment rejecting Means’s claim to evict Comcast is affirmed.

1977NOTES [1] In State v. Prater, La., 337 So.2d 1107 (1976), the majority of this Court held that a trial court's denial of defendant's request that the penalty provision of the statute under which he was charged be included in the judge's charge to the jury was proper.

1961“We again submit that there is no reason in law for forcing litigants to go through two law suits, one a boundary action and the other a petitory action, in order to settle the boundary.” Subsequent to rendition of the decisions in Sattler v. Pellichino, supra, and Collett v. Otis, supra, the Supreme Court handed down the decision in Sessum v. Hemperley, 1957, 233 La. 444 , 96 So.2d 832 , wherein defendant’s plea of thirty years prescription was maintained in a boundary action and the line established along a visible boundary to which defendant had possessed for more than 30 years.

1961“We again submit that there is no reason in law for forcing litigants to go through two law suits, one a boundary action and the other a petitory action, in order to settle the boundary.” Subsequent to rendition of the decisions in Sattler v. Pellichino, supra, and Collett v. Otis, supra, the Supreme Court handed down the decision in Sessum v. Hemperley, 1957, 233 La. 444 , 96 So.2d 832 , wherein defendant’s plea of thirty years prescription was maintained in a boundary action and the line established along a visible boundary to which defendant had possessed for more than 30 years.

1926Reiser Machine Shops, 120 La. 598 , 45 South. 518 , the court said: “The rule that a party who denies his signature to a document upon which he is being sued is cut off from every other defense applies equally in the case where the document is being urged by way of defense.” Here the check was being used as a means of defense, the endorsement or signature to which was denied by plaintiff, having been proved to be his signature he was debarred from every other defense.