
    No. 11,700.
    Clara Coco vs. F. Gumbel, Liquidator; Perkins Bros. vs. F. Gumbel, Liquidator (Consolidated).
    One who claims the ownership of a note secured by mortgage and a subrogation by purchase, who is not shown to have been a creditor, is not entitled to legal subrogation. The defendant, on the notes paid by him for the maker, is not entitled to legal subrogation.
    APPEAL from the Tenth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Avoyeiles. Lafargue, J., ad hoc.
    
    
      J. G. Gappel and Joffrion & Joffrion for Plaintiffs, Appellees.
    
      G. H. Couvillon and Saunders, Miller, Smith & Hirsh for Defendant, Appellant.
    Argued and submitted, March 16, 1895.
    Opinion handed down, April 8, 1895.
    Rehearing refused, May 20, 1895.
   The plaintiffs, as holders of the notes of which Paulin J. Coco was the maker, secured by vendor’s mortgage, bearing in favor of his vendor, Robert Coco, assert by third oppositions, that F. Gumbel, liquidator, had no privilege or mortgage; that he was not subrogated to rights of Thorpe, the vendor of Robert Coco, but that he had absolutely paid the notes, and that he had thereby entirely extinguished the vendor’s mortgage.

The court having determined the question of law presented by an appeal, when i( appears that through error, there was an omission to introduce certain evidence to explain receipts given, and the court concludes such error should not prejudice the defendant and appellant, the case will be remanded.

Breaux, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.  