47 So. 606 | La. | 1908
Lead Opinion
Sued by the plaintiff company on his subscription to 50 shares of its capital stock, the defendant seeks to escape liability by pleading an alleged fatal variance between the charter of the company and the terms of his subscription; the charter requiring subscriptions of stock to be “paid in cash,” and the terms of his subscription being “25 per cent, per month until full payment”
We prefer to rest our decision on the es-toppel. 10 Cyc. 531, 536; 26 A. & E. E. of L. 847; Wormser v. Metropolitan St. R. Co., 184 N. Y. 83, 76 N. E. 1036, 112 Am. St. Rep. 596; 6 A. & E. Annotated Cases, 123, 126.
Judgment affirmed, at relator’s cost.
Rehearing
On Rehearing.
Defendant calls attention to the fact that the estoppel upon which the court based its opinion was not pleaded. It did not need to be, since the answer of a defendant is open to every objection of law or fact as if specially pleaded, replication not being allowed under our law. Hen. Dig. 1155, No. 1.
Rehearing refused.