Howard v. Cardella
| Citation | 132 So. 501,171 La. 921 |
| Decision Date | 02 February 1931 |
| Docket Number | 30740 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | HOWARD v. CARDELLA et ux |
Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans; Walter L Gleason, Judge.
Action by Sam Howard against Mr. and Mrs. Matteo P. Cardella. From the adverse part of the judgment, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed in part and rendered.
Theo. Cotonio, Jr., and Theo. Cotonio, both of New Orleans, for appellant.
Joseph Rosenberg, of New Orleans, for appellee.
Plaintiff sued the defendants, Matteo P. Cardella and Mrs. Eva Benson his wife, on two notes signed by them jointly and severally, and secured by mortgage on property real and personal belonging to the community of acquets and gains existing between them.
There was judgment below against the husband for the full amount claimed and recognizing the mortgages securing the notes. From this judgment the husband has not appealed.
As to the wife the trial judge refused plaintiff a personal judgment for the amount of the notes. And from this judgment the plaintiff appeals.
The only defense set up by the wife is that the debt sued upon was a debt of the husband and of the community, and that she cannot be held responsible for the same.
As we have said, the suit is upon notes signed by the wife as well as by the husband. So that the wife has bound herself personally thereon, if it was legal for her to do so.
As the debt was a debt of her husband, she could not have done so prior to the passage of Act No. 132 of 1926, p. 208 (). For prior to that time she could not bind herself for the debts of her husband. Rev. Civ. Code, art. 2398; Act No. 94 of 1916, Lorio v. Gladney, 147 La. 930, 86 So. 365; Act No. 244 of 1918; Hicks Motor Co. v. Caldwell, 148 La. 21, 86 So. 598; Act No. 219 of 1920.
But by the express terms of Act No. 132 of 1926, p. 208 (), a married woman is expressly authorized "to bind and obligate herself personally or as surety for her husband or any other person." And hence, "as she may bind herself for the benefit of her husband, who is by law the head and master of the community, and responsible for its debts, by reasonable implication she may bind herself for a debt of the community, for such a debt is the husband's debt." Mathews Bros. v. Bernius, 169 La. 1069, 126 So. 556, 557.
We are therefore of opinion that plaintiff was entitled to personal judgment against the wife as well...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Consolidation Loans, Inc. v. Guercio
...of a promissory note and mortgage binds herself personally thereon and may be sued individually for such indebtedness. Howard v. Cardella, 171 La. 921, 132 So. 501; United Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Haley, 178 La. 63, 150 So. 833; Perdido Finance Co. v. Falgout, La.App., 77 So.2d 896; Frie......
-
Loubat v. Audubon Life Ins. Co.
... ... Howard[248 La. 193] v. Cardella et ux., 171 La. 921, 132 So. 501, United Life and Accident Insurance Company v. Haley et ux., 178 La. 63, 150 So. 833, ... ...
-
Aldrich v. Usry, Civ. A. No. 2249.
... ... v. Haley, 178 La. 63, 150 So. 833; Mathews Bros. v. Bernius, 169 La. 211 F. Supp. 337 1069, 126 So. 556; Howard v. Cardella, 171 La. 921, 132 So. 501 ... Counsel for both the taxpayer and the Government rely on the case of Britt's Estate v ... ...
-
Shell Petroleum Corporation v. Calcasieu Real Estate & Oil Co.
... ... the community. Mathews Bros. v. Bernius, 169 La ... 1069, 1075, 126 So. 556, 558; Howard v. Cardella, ... 171 La. 921, 132 So. 501; United Life & Accident ... Insurance Co. v. Haley and Wife, 178 La. 63, 150 So ... 833, 834. These ... ...