214 So. 3d 880
La. Ct. App.2017Background
- On March 17, 2010 Eugene Dix and Eric Cazaubon signed a promissory note for $32,250 payable to Richardson Wholesale, stating "the undersigned promises to pay." Signatures did not indicate capacity.
- Neither maker paid; Richardson sued both Dix and Cazaubon on October 17, 2013 for the full amount plus interest.
- Trial was continued from Sept. 23, 2015 so defendants could obtain counsel; court warned no further continuances. Neither defendant appeared at the October 21, 2015 trial despite notice; trial proceeded in their absence and judgment for Richardson was signed Nov. 4, 2015.
- Cazaubon filed a motion for new trial admitting nonappearance and asserting he signed only as a witness (not an obligor) and that Dix had assured him Dix would appear and defend; hearing Jan. 21, 2016 proffers of testimony were rejected and the motion was denied.
- Court of appeal reviewed the judgment holding both Dix and Cazaubon solidarily liable for $32,250 plus interest and affirmed denial of the new trial; Cazaubon appealed both rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the promissory note created joint/solidary obligation by Cazaubon | Note language ("the undersigned promises to pay") binds both signatories as obligors | Cazaubon claimed he signed only as a witness and not as a maker/guarantor | Court held the note unambiguous; plain language obligated both signatories as makers/solidary obligors |
| Whether the trial court abused discretion in denying Cazaubon's motion for new trial | Richardson argued denial was proper given prior continuance and Cazaubon's failure to appear despite notice and admonition | Cazaubon argued he had good grounds (mistaken belief he was only a witness, reliance on Dix to defend) and should be allowed to present that defense | Court found no abuse of discretion: defendant was warned, served with notice, failed to appear; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Clovelly Oil Co., LLC v. Midstates Petroleum Co., LLC, 112 So.3d 187 (La. 2013) (contract language interpreted by words’ common and usual meaning)
- Coutee v. Global Marine Drilling Co., 924 So.2d 112 (La. 2006) (manifest error standard for appellate review of facts)
- Alexander v. Pellerin Marble & Granite, 630 So.2d 706 (La. 1994) (consequences of finding manifest error)
- Long v. Long, 895 So.2d 34 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2005) (burden shifts to defendant to prove affirmative defenses after note admitted)
- Brown v. Hudson, 700 So.2d 932 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1997) (trial court discretion in ruling on motions for new trial)