3 La. App. 263 | La. Ct. App. | 1925
This is a suit for money loaned.
The plaintiff alleged that he loaned to the defendant the sum of $240 evidenced by the following checks payable to the defendant, endorsed by him, and used for his personal uses, viz:
1st Check No. 383 on Whitney Bank by petitioner dated February 3, 1924, for the sum of___________________________$ 50.00
2nd Check No. 382 on Whitney Bank by petitioner dated March 1, 1924, for ------------------------------------------------------- 50.00
3rd Check on Marine Bank and Trust Co. dated July 19, 1924, signed by defendant through defendant’s corporation for__________________________ 140.00
Making a total of___________________$240.00
On the trial of the case defendant was absent and not represented.
There was judgment in favor of plaintiff and against the defendant as prayed for.
A rule for a new trial was taken upon the ground that “owing to serious illness in the family of the defendant’s attorney, defendant was not represented in court”. A few days later the judge recalled the rule. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the judge erred. The general denial filed was not suggestive of any serious defense, and the failure of the defendant to deny his signature to the check was an admission that he had signed it.
C. P. 325, 1 H. D. 223; Tyler vs. Marcelin & Depas, 8 La. Ann. 312.
The defendant took a suspensive appeal. In this court defendant failed to suggest any defense to the suit.
The plaintiff has prayed for ten per cent damages for frivolous appeal. We think he is entitled to them. C. P. 907.
It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be affirmed with ten per cent damages for frivolous appeal.
