
    COULON vs. CHAMPLIN ET AL.
    Eastern Dist.
    
      June, 1840.
    APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE PIRST DISTRICT.
    Notice of protest left at the domicil or dwelling house of the endorser, is sufficient.
    This is an action on a promissory note, against the endorser. His only defence is want of legal notice of protest. The notary states that “ notice of protest was left at his domicil with a colored woman, he not being in, and there being no white person about the premises.” There was judgment against him, and he appealed.
    
      L. C. Duncan, for the plaintiff.
    
      Larue, contra.
   Morphy, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant, being sued as endorser of a promissory note, pleaded the general issue. The only point made in the cause turns on the insufficiency of the notice given to him. The certificate of the notary states, “that notice of protest was left at defendant’s domicil with a colored woman, he not being in, and there being no white person in or about the premises ” It has been held by this court, that notice of non-payment given to endorsers by leaving it at their dwelling houses, is sufficient. 6 Louisiana Reports, 729, Franklin vs. Verbois et al. Damages have been prayed for by appellee, and should, we think, be allowed.

It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed, with costs, and ten per cent, damages.  