Volume 10 — Louisiana Reports

Eastern Dist. This is an action on a policy of insurance, to recover the ' . , , amount insured on a steam-boat. The plaintiffs allege that they insured the sum of five thousand dollar's, at the office of the defendants, on their steam-boat, called the Fair Star, her engine, tackle* apparel, &c., for the term o'f six months, commencing the 5th March, ,1828; the boat, engine, tackle, &c., being valued at twenty thousand dollars.

Eastern Dist. AITEAL FROM THE COÜRT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTICT, TIIE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. Held: that such an order of the Court of Probates is not evidence of debt sufficient to found an action upon; and that it is not a decree within the meaning of the law. .6.

iWEii FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. EASTERN DlST. This is an action for the rescission of a lease. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant is indebted t.o him in the sum of seventeen hundred and fifty dollars, being the amount of the last quarter’s rent of certain premises in faubourg Delor, in the city of New-Orleans, ending the 1st of January, 1836.

APPEAL PROM THE COURT 01’ THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OE THE EIGHTH PRESIDING.

EASTERN DlST. This is an action instituted by the plaintiffs, as heirs of Alexander Ingram, deceased, in the parish' of East Baton Rouge, against the defendant and another as principal surety in a curator’s bond ; in which they claim the penalty therein, amounting tc> sixteen hundred dollars.

<p>Eastern- Dist.</p> <p>APPEAR FROM THE COURT OP PROBATES FOR TIIE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE.</p> <p>This is an action commenced in tbe Court of Probates for the parish of East Baton Rouge, by the executors of the late John Anderson, in which they present their account of the administration of the decedent’s estate, accompanied by the proper vouchers, with a detailed statement of the moneys received and disbursed by them. They allege that one of them, as he was authorized by the testator to do, took into his possession the plantation and slaves of the deceased, and administered them from August to October, 1833, when one W. A. Anderson, for himself, and as attorney for the other heirs, caused themselves to be recognized as such, and were put in the possession of said property and estate.</p> <p>The executors further allege, that they are bound to see that the provisions of the will are carried into effect; but that the- heirs have refused to do so, especially, to pay a legacy of one thousand dollars, bequeathed to Phebe, a colored woman, and also a negro child, borne since the date of the will, from Louisa, the latter of whom was also bequeathed to Phebe.</p> <p>The executors likewise claim the sum of two thousand and twelve dollars, as a commission of two and one half per cent, on the inventory of the testator’s succession, amounting to eighty thousand four hundred and eighty-eight dollars, after deducting two thousand four hundred and eighty-eight dollars, for bad debts.</p> <p>; They pray that they may be allowed and may have decreed to them the several sums and objects specified, and for the purposes alleged; and that the account of their administration be approved and homologated, and that they be discharged.</p> <p>The attorneys for the heirs filed exceptions to the petition and account of the executors, and specially deny that they are entitled to commissions of two and one half per cent, on the whole amount of the estate of the decedent, but only on' such part as actually came into their possession, to wit, the. J proceeds of sixty bales of cotton, sold by order of the Court of Probates, the executors not being constituted detainers of the estate by the will. The defendants also except to so much of the executors’ demand as requires the payment of one thousand dollars for the legacy to Phebe, and the delivery of Louisa’s child to. her. They aver that the Probate Court is without jurisdiction of the latter claims, the District Court alone having jurisdiction of such matters. They conclude with a prayer that their exceptions be sustained, and for general relief.</p> <p>The will under which the executors acted, is in the olographic form, and contains the following clauses, to wit:</p> <p>“I hereby will and bequeath to my brother William Anderson, merchant, in Richmond, Virginia, Helen Anderson and Margaret Young, my youngest sister, both residents of the same city, all my property, real and personal, to be equally divided to each, except the following donations, viz: I leave to Phebe, one hundred acres of land, known by the name of Taguinos Place, with all the improvements thereon, and four negroes, viz : Phil, Jeanny, Big Louisa and Long Frank, and one thousand dollars in cash, to be invested in bank stock. At the death of Phebe, the said land and negroes, and increase, .to become the property of a yellow boy by the name of Alexander, son of Jeanny; and in case of his death, to revert back to my said heirs. This I do for Phebe, for her long and faithful services to me.</p> <p>“ I hereby appoint A. Bird, general P. Thomas and major Vail, my executors of this my last will and testament, and earnestly request them' that every thing may be settled amicably between my heirs, and that no law-suit on any account shall be between them. If they cannot agree, let it be settled by arbitration,” &c.</p> <p>The testator also annexed a schedule of his estate to the will, estimated by him at one hundred and seventeen thousand and one hundred dollars. The will was duly admitted to probate, two of the executors, Bird and Vail, qualified and acted under it.</p> <p>On the trial, the plaintiffs proved by witnesses their possession and seizin of Anderson’s succession. This testimony was excepted to on the ground that no parole evidence of seizin or possession could be received. The will must authorize and show it.</p> <p>The judge of probates overruled the exceptions of the defendants. He considered that under articles 1676 and 1652 of the Louisiana Code the executors had a right to the seizin of the estate, and that under the will they had possession and administered the whole property of the testator, and that they were entitled to their commissions on the amount of the inventory as prayed for.</p> <p>Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiffs against the defendants, homologating the accounts of the executors; allowing them their full commissions, and that they recover one thousand dollars to pay the legacy to Phebe, and the. slave child of Louisa, born since the date of the will, and that the defendants pay costs. The latter appealed.</p> <p>1. That the executors had the actual possession and the seizin of 'the testator’s estate, as appears from the face of the will itself. It shows that the heirs were all non-residents, and they did not obtain possession for several months after the succession was opened.</p> <p>2. In the construction of olographic wills, effect should be given to the intention of the testator, as gathered from all the circumstances of the case, and the relative position and situation of the parties. It is not to be expected, that men unacquainted with the niceties of the law, will execute then-olographic wills with that technical accuracy specified. That seizin was intended to be given to the executors in this case, is evident from the general power conferred on them to manage the estate.</p> <p>3. The Probate Court is required to appoint an attorney to represent the absent heirs, which was done in this case, as they were all absent. He is to act until the succession is liquidated and settled, and how could it be settled, if the executors have not the seizin 1 Louisiana Code, articles Í 654-5, 1705-6 and 8.</p> <p>4. The judgment homologating the executors’ account, is correct, not having been opposed by the attorney for the absent heirs. So far as any account might be claimed by the heirs, they are precluded in this casé, by the judgment and proceeding putting them into the possession of the estate, which is res judicata. 3 Martin, 481. 9 Ibid., 727. 2 Louisiana Reports, 587. Code of Practice, 1004, 1008, 997.</p> <p>5. The part of the judgment decreeing the payment of the legacy to Phebe, and the delivery to her of the slave child, is correct. The executors are required to see the provisions of the will are complied with, and the intentions of the testator carried into effect. Until this is done, the executors are bound to act. Louisiana Code, 1655.</p> <p>Elam submitted the following additional points on the part of the plaintiffs.</p> <p>1. The judgment of the Probate Court is contrary to law and evidence, and should be reversed.</p> <p>2. The executors had not, either by the will or law, seizin of the whole estate, and could not charge commission thereon. See Will, Louisiana Code, articles 1652, 1653. Napoleon Code, 1026.</p> <p>3. That part of the will which gives a donation to Phebe, contains a substitution; hence it is null and void. Louisiana Code, articles 12, 1567. 5 Martin, N. S., 302. 6 Louisiana Reports 321. Therefore, the executors could not demand the slave child, nor the investment of the one thousand dollars as a legacy.</p> <p>4. There is no proof that, this child is the offspring of Louisa, or that Louisa had any child bom subsequent to the making of the will.</p>

Eastern Dist. A.rPEAL FROM the tarish court for the tarish and city oe NEW-ORLEANS. This case has already been before this’ court. See 9 Louisiana Reports, 189. On the return of the case to the Parish Court, it was tried ■on the opposition of Brette & Vincent, on a charge of fraud against the insolvent, sworn to by Edward Vincent.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST. This is an action of partition instituted by Adelaide Webre, wife of U. Haydel, to provoke a partition and division of the estate of her deceased father, the late Jean Webre. The other heirs were all made defendants. A partition was made an(j homogated by a judgment of the Court, of Probates, from which Désirée Webre, one of the defendants, appealed.

Eastern Dist.' APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT POR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is a redhibitory action for the rescission of the sale of a slave, and to recover back the price. The plaintiff alleges he purchased a female slave from the defendant, for seven hundred dollars, about nine or ten months ago; and that she had been sick of a pulmonary complaint ever since, which has cost him in nursing and medical attendance, upwards of one hundred and fifty dollars.

Easeeiin Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. , This is an action on an account, annexed, for professional services in the capacity of an attorney at law. ' The plaintiff alleges that the defendant owes him the sum of fifteen hundred and'ten dollars for professional services rendered during the three preceding years, in the courts of the two parishes of Ascension and Assumption. He prays judgment for said sum.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT FOR T11E PARISH AND, CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is a redhibitory action, for the rescission of the sale and return of the price and expenses of a slave, which is alleged to have died of a redhibitory disease.

Eastern Dist. ArPBAL FROM THE COURT 03? THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This suit originally commenced in the via executiva by the plaintiff, to enforce his demand against three slaves, which he had previously sold to the defendant, for the sum of two thousand two hundred dollars, 'the payment of which was secured by a mortgage on said slaves.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT FOR THE PARISH AMD CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is an action to recover back a sum of money which had been advanced by the plaintiff, in obedience to calls by the board of directors, on twenty-eight shares of stock in the Louisiana Insurance Company, sold by the former to the defendant.

<p>Eastern Dist.</p> <p>ATrEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT.</p> <p>This is a petitory action, in which the plaintiffs, residing in France and claiming as heirs of the late Pierre Augustin Meuillon, his succession, which was opened in the parish of St. Charles about the year 1810, now seek to recover a house and lot in the possession of the defendant, situated at the comer of Bienville and Levee streets, in New-Orleans, which they allege forms a part of Meuillon’s succession.</p> <p>The defendant sets up title to the property in question, by purchase from the late Pierre St. Amand, by public act dated the 8th of May, 1815, for the price and sum of fourteen thousand dollars, with a general warranty of title. He calls the natural children of St. Amand, who succeeded to his estate, in warranty.</p> <p>Upon these issues, the parties went to trial.</p> <p>The facts and evidence of the case are given with great minuteness and accuracy, in the reasons for the judgment rendered by the district judge, which serve as a statement of the case. They are as follow :</p> <p>“To advert to the events pertinent to the case in the order of time, we begin by stating, that, as is alleged, Jean Franqois Daspic St. Amand intermarried with Marie Franqoise Dubuisson, at New-Orleans, in 1722. It will be found that the controversy turns on the proof of this marriage. The fruit of this alleged marriage were Pierre St. Amand, born in 1725, and Dominic St. Amand, born in 1728.</p> <p>“ Jean Franqois Daspic St. Amand died in 1729. Antoine Meuillon emigrated from Grenoble, in France, and in 1732 married Marie Franqoise Dubuisson, widow of Daspic S:t. Amand.</p> <p>“Marie Framjoise Dubuisson died in 1738; Antoine Meuillon died in 1767.</p> <p>“ The fruit of their marriage was Louis Augustin Meuillon, bom at Pointe Coupée, in 1733, and who died, in 1810, without leaving issue. '</p> <p>“ The litigation is in relation to his succession. At the time of the decease of Louis Augustin Meuillon, in 1810, his uterine brothers Pierre and Dominic St. Amand were both ¿¡eceasec| • ]3Ut they had left children, nephews of Louis Augustin Meuillon.</p> <p>“ The petitioners claim the succession of Louis Augustin Mepillon, alleging themselves to be his nearest relations, in 1810, the time of his decease.</p> <p>“ The children of Pierre and Dominic St. Amand, as the nephews and heirs of Louis Augustin Meuillon, on his decease, in 1810, took possession of his estate and had it sold. By successive conveyances, the property sued for came to the defendant, Banks; and by successive calls in warranty, the legal and instituted heirs of Pierre and Dominic St. Amand are made the final defendants.</p> <p>“ The original petition claimed for plaintiffs only as legal heirs. An amended petition claimed for them as instituted heirs under a will, alleged to have been destroyed by defendants’ ancestors. As the court was of opinion that plaintiffs cannnot claim under a will without producing a probate of the will, all evidence under this allegation was excluded, and plaintiffs were driven to rest on their character as legal heirs only.</p> <p>w The plaintiffs having alleged and proved themselves related to Louis Augustin Meuillon (and they are only one degree more remote than the children of Pierre and Dominic St. Amand,) claim to be heirs of said Meuillon, and it became incumbant on the descendants of these persons, not only to show lineal descent from them, which has been done, but also, that Pierre and Dominic St. Amand were legitimate descendants of Marie Frarnjoise Dubuisson ; and, therefore, lawful uterine or maternal brothers of Louis Augustine Meuillon.</p> <p>“ This they have attempted to do, by all the different modes of evidence applicable to the fact:</p> <p>“1. By parole evidence, proving themselves and their ancestors always in possession of the legal quality and condition of legitimate lineal descendants of Marie Framjoise Dubuisson, by her first husband, Daspic St. Amand.</p> <p>“ 2. By the recognition of them as such, by Louis Augustin Meuillon, and by their being treated and considered as such by the community.</p> <p>“ 3. By the private writings, notarial acts, &c., in which both Antoine Meuillon and Louis Augustin Meuillon recognized and treated with them as such. Antoine Meuillon divides the succession of their mother between them and his own child, Louis Augustin Meuillon, and acquits himself towards them as their tutor, both in relation to their father’s and mother’s successions.</p> <p>“ 4. By the act of marriage between Antoine Meuillon and Marie Fran^oise Dubuisson, in which she is described as the widow of Daspic St. Amand.</p> <p>“ The evidence on these heads of proof, is of the most plenary description, and carries the most perfect conviction to the mind, of the facts sought to be established by the defendants. But the defendants have further,</p> <p>" 5. Introduced an act of the marriage between Jean Francois Daspic St. Amand and Marie Frantjoise Dubuisson, which took place, as has been stated, in 1722.</p> <p>“ ‘ First register of marriages of the parish church of St. Louis, of New-Orleans, containing three hundred and seventy-six acts of marriages of whites and eleven marriages of negroes, and three acts of abjuration of heresy. The said register begins the first day of the month of July, of the year 1720, and finishes the fourth day of the month of December, of the year 1730.’</p> <p>“ The book is obviously not a collection of original acts, but copies of them, and extracts from them. At the close of the book is a certificate in Spanish, as follows :</p> <p>“ ‘ I, Francis. Antonio de Sedella, religious, capuchin, curate of this church of St. Louis of New-Orleans, certify in the form (que puedo) I have a right to do, that this present register, which contains three hundred and ninety acts of marriage, which were copied and extracted in the time of the government of France over this province, to which full credit and faith should be given; that the original register which contained them, from which they were copied, was found in a ka(j etat6j as were ajs0 t,he conditions of the other registers of this chureh, caused by the devouring fire, which took place in this capital on 21st March, 1788, and that this may appear, I attest.</p> <p>Signed, PR. ANTONIO DE SEDELLA, Curate.’</p> <p>“ The act of marriage is as follows :</p> <p>“ ‘No. 119, fol. 40. Jean Franqois de St. Amand, with Marie Franqoise Dubuisson.</p> <p>“ ‘ In the year 1722, 13th April, I, the undersigned, curate of New-Orleans, have received the mutual consent of marriage of Jean Francois St. Amand Daspic, son of Jacques Daspic, and of Dominique Bordeliére, his father and mother, and of Marie Franqoise Dubuisson, daughter of Leon Dubuisson and of Mañane Canop, her father and mother, in presence of Pierre Dreux, of Martharine Dreux, of Pierre Alexis Desjardins, of Franqois Quasido, and of Claude Pierre Hyronée, who have signed ; with me also signed St.-Amand Dreux, M. Dreux, and J. Richard, curate.’</p> <p>“ This act of marriage is ‘ attacked as not being in conformity with the ordonnance of 1667 on this subject, made in France, which requires the act of marriage to be signed by the parties, by at least four witnesses, or a declaration that they know not how to sign.</p> <p>“ That the act does not express that the banns were published.</p> <p>“ That the nuptial benediction is not stated to have been given.</p> <p>“ That it does not appear that the curate was the local curate of New-Orleans.</p> <p>“ That it is not stated that the marriage was celebrated ; only that a consent to marry was given.</p> <p>“ That it is not stated that the marriage was in the face of the church.</p> <p>. “ There appears much boldness in the attempt to have a marriage declared null, which was made one hundred and thirteen years ago, and the descendants from which have ever since been in the undisputed possession of the quality, character and condition of lineal legitimate descendants of the married persons, and who were acknowledged, treated with, and recognized as legitimate, by the only persons who had an interest to make the question.</p> <p>“ One of the counsel of the plaintiffs adverted to a principle of law, that when a plaintiff in a petitory action makes out a prima facie, title or case, the burden of proof is thrown on the defendant to show a better title. This position is true, but it is also true, that when the defendant has in turn shown a prima facie good title in himself, the burden of proof is shifted back on the plaintiff, to rebut and destroy it.</p> <p>“ The counsel admitted the truth of this position so far as to say, that if defendants had rested on their proof by witnesses, private writings and> notarial acts, they would fully have established their lineal legitimacy as descendants of Marie Franchise Dubuisson, but that the production of the act of marriage, defective in essential forms, had paralized the other proofs.</p> <p>“ In relation to this part of the subject, I concur in the application by defendant’s counsel, of the principle, that the laws of a mother country when applied to her colonies, are always to be modified to the situation, wants, and circumstances of the colony. This register is described as the first register of marriages. It is to be presumed there were marriages before 1720; and even if it were proved they were made before a commandant for want of a curé, or of any other public officer, as among the Anglo-American population justices of the peace presided at marriages for want of a clergyman, the necessity of the case would make the law of it.</p> <p>“ In Pizero vs. Meuillon, for the name of Meuillon figures once before in an interesting case ih our books, the court declared, that the passing of acts before commandants was binding, and the law of the colony, because there were no notaries, and it was the practice. So, it has been decided, that an order to admit a will to probate, implied an order to execute the will. Authorities could be cumulated without number on analagous questions, according to which it has been held, that great allowance for ignorance, unskillfulness or peculiar circumstances of a colony, is to be made, and the law applied as it was then understood and practised. It is the common law of colonies.</p> <p>“ These principles repel many, if not all the objections and exceptions to this act of marriage, if they Avere ever so clearly established. On examination, it will be found that the acts of marriage in the register produced, are recorded in different forms, by different individuals. If the case Avere much more modern, and the proof much more defective than it is, the certificate of the condition in which the records were, Avhen copied, Avould give the court ample room for presumption, and the court Avould presume a great deal in favor of a quality and condition of married persons, recognized as such by all the connections ; and it appears to me, a court is bound to presume any thing and every thing in support of a civil condition and quality of one hundred years’ standing in Louisiana, which has been hitherto unimpeached.</p> <p>“ It Avill presume every thing that is necessary to make this extract, for it is so styled, to be an extract from an original, complete in all respects.</p> <p>“As was observed by a counsel for defendants, if the evidence in this case does not establish the civil condition of this family, the inhabitants of Louisiana of French descent may as well at once surrender their estates to the descendants of their common ancestors in France.</p> <p>“ I consider, that the quality and condition of the children of Pierre and Dominic St. Amand, as heirs of Louis Augustin Meuillon, in 1810, is fully established.”</p> <p>Judgment Avas rendered in favor of the defendant, from which the plaintiffs appealed.</p>

Eastmot Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE PXRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an action in which the plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of five hundred dollars, as a privileged claim on the proceeds of the sale of a barge, in the hands of the city marshal of New-Orleans.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This suit commenced by injunction. The plaintiff alleges, that in the year 1822 she obtained a judgment of separation of property from her husband, decreeing to her the restoration of her paraphernal effects, which decree was duly executed, and that she has been openly and notoriously in the possession and administration thereof.

Easkbun Dist. APPBAI. FROM, the'COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUSE. This suit was instituted b'y Abraham, John and Thompson Bird, uncles of the minor children of William Bird, their deceased brother, to remove the defendant, Andrew Black, from his office of under-tutor to said minors, on account of neglect and want of proper attention to their interests.

<p>The District Court has jurisdiction in an action of partition, when it embraces two objects ; first, to ascertain and determine the rights of .the parties to the property in question; and, second, to decree a partition between them.</p> <p>Whether an act, which is set up as a sale, be good as such or not ? yet if it be clothed with all the formalities required by law, to give force and eifect to donations inter vivos, it will be considered and held valid as a donation.</p> <p>A donation inter vivos can comprehend only the present property of the donor; if it comprehends property to come, as regards that, it will be null: Held, that where a donation was made of lands, of which the donor was in possession only under an inchoate or equitable title, which was afterwards confirmed to him, the donation was valid on the perfection of title.</p> <p>The District Court has jurisdiction in an action of partition, when it embraces two objects, first, to ascertain and determine die rights of the parties to the property in question $ and, second, to decree a partition between them.</p> <p>Whether an act, which is set up as a sale, be good as such or not? yet if it be clothed with all the formalities required by law, to give force and effect to donations inter vivos, it will be considered and held valid as a donation.</p> <p>a donation in- “- ly the present ^onor^ífiteom-come" asitregardsthat, Held, that where madenaof°iandsS of which the donor was m possession only un-^equitable0 ti-whi1c'1 was firmed to him, the donation was vaua on the per-Action of title,</p>

Eastern Dist. APrEAL PROM THE COURT OE THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OE THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This suit commenced by injunction.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM TIIE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING.

Eastern Dra-r. AFTEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This is an action of slander.

<p>Sureties in in solido, in a bond given to release property of the debtor, attached at the suit of his creditors, are bound to pay such judgment as may be rendered in favor of the plaintiffs in attachment. It is no defence to an action on the bond against the sureties, that they pointed out property," in which the common debtor had an interest, and that the plaintiffs neglected to seize it in satisfaction of their judgment.</p> <p>Sureties in in solido, in a bond given to release property of the debtor, attached at the suit of his creditors, are bound to pay such judgment as may be rendered in favor of the plaintiffs in attachment. It is no defence to an action on the bond against the sureties, that they pointed out properly in which the common debtor had cm interest, and that the plaintiffs neglected to seize it in satisfaction of their judgment.</p>

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action against the defendant, C. G. Johnson, as drawer, and Brisbane Marshall, as co-obligor of the following promissory note. “ On or before the first day of March, 1832, I promise to pay Josias Gray, or bearer, nine hundred and thirty-seven dollars, and the same to bear ten per cent, per annum after due, until paid.

EASTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an action by a partner, against the defendants Wright and Gould, as his co-partners, for the adjustment of their partnership accounts, in which the plaintiff claims a balance due to him from the firm, of seven hundred and fifty dollars and thirteen cents, for which he prays judgment; or for such sum as may be found due. .

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM TIIE COURT OP THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT,'THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This is an action by the plaintiff, against her husband, for a separation from bed and board, and for a division and separation of property. The plaintiff alleges that she has been cruelly and outrageously treated by her husband, without her fault, so as to ■render their living together insupportable.

Eastern Dist. lUTEAE FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE .THEREOF PRESIDING. This is a petitory action, in which the plaintiffs succeeded in recovering from the defendants three undivided fourths of two tracts of land adjoining, situated on the bayou Manchac, as having been the property of the late James- Fletcher and wThich had never been legally sold since his death in June, 1804. See 4 Louisiana Reports, 267.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This is an action against the defendant as curator of the estate of one Willis Thornton, an absentee, to render him personally liable, and recover the sum of two thousand and ninety-nine dollars, with interest and costs, due by the said absentee.

Eastern Dxst. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP PROBATES, POR THE PARISH AND CITY OP NEW-ORLEANS. This is an action instituted against the succession of the late J. M. Zacharie, to recover the sum of eight hundred and' thirty-three dollars and fifty-two cents, which the administrator refuses to pay.

Easteiust Bist. APPEAL PROM THE COÜRT OP THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

<p>The owners of steam-boats are liable for losses occasioned by collisions and injuries done by them to other vessels, which might' have been avoided by due diligence and care.</p> <p>The owners of .liable for tosses collisions^ and injuries^done^by vessels, which OTmdecTbythie diligence and caie'</p>

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE -OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This suit commenced by injunction to restrain the sheriff of East Baton Rouge from proceeding to sell a certain house and lot in the town of Baton Rouge, seized in virtue of an order of seizure and sale obtained by the defendants.

Eastebm Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. The plaintiff appealed from a judgment dissolving an injunction which he had obtained against the bank. The sheriff served the citation and copy of the petition of appeal on the attorney of the bank, when its officers were in the state. moved to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that there was no legal service of the citation of appeal.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. •This is an action to recover a paraphernal right of the defendant’s wife in his hands, as evidenced by his receipt for the sum of five hundred and sixty-six dollars and thirty-nine cents, received from her mother’s estate.

<p>ON A REHEARING.</p> <p>In. a possessory action, a plea in reconvention involving title, will be disregarded; but the right of the defendant in such cases, to attack the title of the plaintiff in a direct action, will be reserved.</p> <p>In. a possessory action, a plea in reconvention involving title, will be disregarded ^ but the right of tire defendant, in such •cases, to attaek the title of the plaintiff* in a direct action, will be reserved.</p>

Eastemt Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE , JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This is an action instituted against one John Holston, as administrator of the estate of a deceased brother, to render him individually liable, as well as the defendant, who is his surety for the sum of $ 1800, which the plaintiff alleges is due him by said estate, on several promissory notes.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action to recover the balance of a mercantile account, amounting to three hundred dollars and seventy-seven cents, instituted by the late firm of Rogers, Slocumb & Co. against the defendant. It was commenced by attachment, in the parish of East Baton Rouge, the defendant residing in the state of Illinois. .

EASTERN DlST. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, TIIE JUDGE OP THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. ■ This is an action on the following promissory note, to recover the amount from the makers thereof: “On the first day of January, 1833, we promise to pay to Moses Moore, or bearer, the sum of three hundred and ten dollars, with ten per cent, per annum, until paid.

EASTERN DlST. APTEAL FROM THE COURT OJ? THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, TIIE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action founded on two promissory notes, amounting to one thousand two hundred and twenty dollars, bearing interest at the rate of ten per cent, per annum from their dates respectively until paid, and made payable to “Elizabeth Cox, (plaintiff,) Thomas Bills, and Elizabeth Bills, or bearer, and signed by Matthew Bethany, the defendant.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOP PRESIDING. This is a petitory action, in which the plaintiff claims one hundred and sixty acres of land, now in the possession of the defendant, Cooper. The plaintiff alleges he purchased said land from the government of the United States, as evidenced by the receipt of the receiver of public, money at St. Helena, dated the 16th day of November, 1831. The defendants pleaded a general denial.

Eastern Dist. ArPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This is an action by the plaintiff as assignee of the following promissory note against the defendant, Overbay, as endorser, and also, against the maker of said note.

<p>Eastern Dist.</p> <p>APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE ^TUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.</p> <p>This is an action instituted by the trustees of the Louisiana college, .established at Jackson, in East Feliciana, to recover from the defendant the sum of five hundred dollars, .the amount of his subscription to said eollege.</p> <p>The action is brought on the following instrument of writing:</p> <p>“We, the subscribers,'agree and bind ourselves to pay the sums severally annexed to our names, to. any person or persons who may be appointed by the legislature of the state of Louisiana to receive the same, in behalf of a college, which may be established in the town of Jackson, East Feli-ciana. It is, however, expressly understoqd, that no obligation is hereby created against the ..subscribers, unless the said legislature do establish a college with an endowment, in the said town, at their next session. And, if a college be established, as aforesaid, we waive all informality in this obligation; those who subscribe two hundred dollars, or under, to pay in equal instalments of one and two years; those who subscribe over two hundred dollars, to pay the amount of their subscriptions in annual instalments of one hundred dollars, subsequent to the passage of a bill relative to said institution.” “Jackson, 6th September, 1824.”</p> <p>“ Mames. Place of Residence. Donation'.”</p> <p>“ H. Keller, Jackson, Five hundred dollars.”</p> <p>The above paper was signed by many other subscribers.</p> <p>On the 18th February, 1825, and at the next session after the defendant subscribed the said subscription paper, the legislature passed a law “To incorporate the College of Louisiana, and fop other purposes,” which located the college at the town of Jackson, in the parish of East Feliciana.</p> <p>The defendant having failed and refused to pay his said subscription, on the 18th March, 1831, a formal demand was made on him, and a protest entered on the instrument by the parish judge, acting as a notary public, for non-payment thereof.</p> <p>The defendant pleaded a general denial; that he was not bound by said instrument of writing, which is a nudempactum, given without consideration; and further, that the plaintiffs were not authorized to collect and demand payment of said money. He further pleaded the prescription of five years, and that the action on said writing is prescribed by the lapse of five years.</p> <p>The district judge, on these pleadings and issues, gave .judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendant appealed.</p> <p>The obligation of the defendant was subject to only one condition, and that was accomplished by the act incorporating the college of Louisiana, and the actual establishment of the same at Jacksou. The obligation 0f defendant then became absolute.</p> <p>1. The agreement of the appellant, upon which judgment was given in the court below, was an imperfect obligation, which could not be enforced in a court of justice.</p> <p>2. It was without legal and sufficient consideration to render it valid and binding.</p> <p>3. It did not become binding on the maker, for want of an acceptance of its conditions by the party to whom it was made. 1 Louisiana Reports, 190.</p> <p>4. There was no party in existence capable of accepting or enforcing its conditions.</p>

Eastern Dist. AI'PEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is, essential^, a petitory action. The plaintiff alleges he entered into a contract with the defendant in 1831, by which he engaged to convey to the latter a certain tract of laud described therein, on a condition precedent that the said defendant should first make a certain road and build a bridge, as mentioned in said contract, before the-day of July, then next ensuing.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This appeal was taken by the syndic of the plaintiff’s creditors, and as a creditor himself, and by another creditor, from a judgment sustaining an opposition, in which the opponents were allowed a privilege and mortgage of the highest order, after the law and other privileged charges, on all the property of the . insolvent, on account of his tutorship.

Eastern- Dtst. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF EAST FELICIANA.

<p>Where the debt claimed by the plaintiff, and the damages sought for in the answer of the defendant, arise from one and the same transaction, the latter claim is a fair and legal demand, which may be pleaded in reconvention.</p> <p>So where demands are different, but have the same origin, and are intimately connected, being the consequence of the same transaction, the defendant may reconvene the plaintiff for damages in his answer in the same suit".</p> <p>Where the debt claimed by the plaintiff, awl soughtfor?nthe answer of the from one andthe tion, the latter and”1 legal ¿tí-mand, which inTeconyentfom</p> <p>man°isWareedifferent, but have the same origin, and aré intimate-ing°ntheCtooase" quenee of the same transaction, the defend-vene^íe plain" tiff for damages in his answer in the same suit,</p>

Western Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OE THE EIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an injunction suit. See 4 Louisiana Reports, 397. On the return of the case to the District Court, the defendant in injunction filed an answer to the merits.

Western Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COÜRT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF LAFAYETTE. This is an action against the defendant as curator of the vacant estate of Elisha B. Mayfield, deceased, founded on a judgment alleged to have been rendered against said May-field for one thousand two hundred and sixty-seven dollars and ninety-five cents, on the 22d of May, 1824, in favor of S. H. Williams and D. C. Mitchell, in the state of Tennessee.

Western Disr. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, TIIE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an action instituted against the defendants for the sum of six hundred and thirty-three dollars and fifty cents, which the plaintiff alleges was due to his deceased wife from André Martin, pére, now deceased, on sundry notes and small accounts of long standing. The plaintiff sues as heir of his wife. She was the daughter of the deceased ancestor of the defendants.

westers Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP PROBATES POR TIIE PARISH OP ST. MART. The plaintiff claims the sum of sixteen hundred and eighty dollars, for her services rendered to the deceased, Samuel Wilkinson, as house-keeper and sole manager of his domestic concerns, for nine years and four months, up to the time of his death, at fifteen dollars per month.

Western-Dirt. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is a petitory action. The plaintiff claims title to two tracts of land situated on the Bayou Téche, in the parish of St. Mary, in the possession and claimed by the defendant. The plaintiff alleges that-the defendant is cultivating and cutting timber from the locus in quo, to his great injury.

WESTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM TIIE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. The plaintiff claims two hundred and forty dollars, which, he alleges, Gerard & Francjois D. Chretien justly owe him, as a mechanic; for labor and services rendered. He alleges, that he was employed by the defendants to work as a mechanic, at the rate of fifty dollars per month, and his boarding allowed him, from the 3d April, 1830, until the end of the crop season.

Western Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF PROBATES, FOR THE PARISH OF ST. LANDRY. This is an action instituted on a security bond, executed in 1821, by Benjamin S. Haw, the then sheriff of the parish of St. Landry, against the executor of the succession of the late Joseph Andrus, one of the sureties in said bond, to recover the sum of one thousand dollars, alleged to be owing to the plaintiff, on account of the illegal conduct of the said sheriff, whilst in office. .

<p>A judgment of another state, rendered under a statute requiring no notice to be given .to the defendant, will not be enforced in this state, whatever may be its effect in that state.</p> <p>The judgment of another state, regularly obtained, when the defendant had been served with process, or had otherwise appeared, is conclusive evidence of the debt. But the defendant must have had due notice or have actually appeared, to give validity to the judgment when sued on here. '</p> <p>Judgments taken by default, even when the party has been cited, cannot be proceeded on by the via executiva. A judgment of another state, rendered under a statute requiring no notice to be given to the defendant, will not be enforced ill this state, whatever maybe its effect in that state.</p> <p>The judgment of another state, regularly obtained, when the defendant had been served with process, or had otherwise appeared, is conclusive evidence of the debt; but the defendant must have had due notice, or have actually appeared, to give validity to the judgment when sued on here.</p> <p>jucigments'ta-ken hr default, even '"’hen the party has been proceedeTon by the via executi-va.</p>

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. > This is an action by the second endorser of a promissory note, discounted in bank for seven hundred dollars, against the first one. Both endorsements are in blank. The bank, as holder of the note, recovered a judgment against the endorsers for the entire sum in solido, which was satisfied by each of them paying one half.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This action commenced by attachment. The plaintiff claims eight hundred and twenty-two dollars and seventy-eight cents from the defendants, who resided in New-Orleans, and attached a sum about equal to his demand, in the hands of one Walter B. Wilcoxon, in the parish of St. Mary, as a debt due and owing to the commercial firm of the defendants.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING.

Western Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OS THE PISTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OS THE. SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an action for work done by the job, and at different times, by the ancestor of the plaintiffs, who was a brick mason and brick maker for the defendant. The services are alleged to have been rendered between the 1st of February, 1830, and the 30th of November following.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This suit is instituted to recover from David Rees, as principal, and John H. Thomas, as surety, the sum of one thousand four hundred and ninety-eight dollars and fourteen cents, as a balance due on the following account; and also a small balance on another account. « Col. David Rees,' “ 1827. • ; To N. Cox, Dr.” June 16.

Western Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE 'JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is a petitory action in which the plaintiff seeks to recover several slaves in the possession of' the defendants, J. N. Field, J. Brownsoñ, J. Y. Saunders and H. Carlin, together with their hire at fifteen dollars per month; and also to recover damages from James Plaisted, who he alleges sold these slaves to the defendants, without right or title to them.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. The plaintiff claims a sum of money for the services of certain slaves of his, which were put on the plantation of the late' James L. Johnson.

Western Dxst. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR TIIE PARISH OF LAFAYETTE. This suit was instituted in the Court of Probates by the plaintiff and her minor child, who, she alleges, are the only legal heirs of Toussaint Arceneaux, deceased, to recover from the defendant the property of his succession. The defendant is .the surviving widow of a brother of the deceased.

Western Dist. Al'PEAL FROM THE COURT OE THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.

Wester* Dist.' APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. In this case the plaintiffs took an appeal from the judgment of the district court rejecting their demand, returnable “on the fourth Monday in Jlugust.* The sum fixed by the judge, for which an appeal bond was to be executed, was two hundred dollars.

Westbbk Dist. APPEAL PROM THE. COURT OP PROBATES POR THE PARISH OP ST. MARY. This is an action by the tutor of the minor son and sole heir, by the first marriage, of the late Dr. John Towles, to recover from the administratrix of his succession sundry sums, which it is alleged the .said Dr. J. Towles received on account of his first wife, and which he never paid over to his said son, after the dissolution of his first marriage.

WESTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES, FOR THE PARISH OF ST. LANDRY. This is an action against the administrator of the estate of the late Murtough Collins, and against Joseph and Jesse Andrus, as sureties in two several curator bonds, given by said Murtough Collins. The plaintiff alleges that he is the only surviving child and heir of John L. and Elizabeth Collins, deceased, who died when he was a minor, leaving a large property.

WESTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This case came before the court on a motion to dismiss the appeal. The plaintiff obtained judgment for five hundred and sixty-seven dollars against the defendant, Cade, and that a certain slave, which the latter had purchased from John Compton and Joseph Walker, as executors of an estate, should be seized and sold to pay said judgment.

<p>Where a family meeting consent to mortgage the property of minors, to obtain a loan, to enable the tutor to discharge a judgment against them, and the loan not being procured, but the tutor pays the amount of the judgment with other funds of the minors’ in his hands, It will be valid.</p> <p>The tutor has a right to dispose of the funds in his hands on his responsibility; and where he pays a judgment obtained against his pupils, the judgment cannot be rescinded and the amount recovered back from the owner who received payment. If the tutor paid without proper authority, the minors must look to him, as in case of maladministration of their estate.</p> <p>Where a family meeting consent to mortgage the property of minors to obtain a loan, to enable the tutor to discharge a judgment against them, and the loan not being procured, hut thetutorpaysthe amount of the judgment with other fpnds of the minors in his hands, it will he valid.</p> <p>The tutor has a right to dispose of the funds in his hands on his responsibility; and where he pays a judgment obtained against his pupils, the judgment cannot be rescinded, and the amount recovered back from the owner, who received payment. If tire tutor paid without proper authority, the minors must look to him as in case of mal-adminis-tration of their estate.</p>

Western Dist. APPEAL FBOM THE COURT OP THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is a petitory action. The plaintiff claims a tract of land on the Bayou Téche, containing eight arpents front, with the depth of forty, situated immediately below that on which the defendant resides, and calling to bind on his lower line. The defendant’s residence is on what is called the “Gravenberg tract.” He is also in possession of the locus in quo.

WnsTimií Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SIXTH PRESIDING. This is an action against the defendants, Robert Cade and John Greig, as owners of .the steamboat Two Friends, to render them liable for the loss of a negro man, who was killed on board, and to recover the sum of one thousand dollars for his value.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.

Western DrsT. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This suit was instituted by Madame Framjaise Pain, wife of Ursin Perret, against her said husband, for a separation of property, and to enforce her legal mortgage for the restitution of her paraphernal property.

Western Dist. APPEAL EDOM TIIE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This suit commenced by injunction.

Westehn Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. The proceedings in the present case originated in a suit for the partition of the succession of Madame Celeste Rogers, deceased. The decedent had successively been the wife of N. Villain, E. Kirkland, and Mr. Rogers, ail deceased. There were two children, Nicholas and Rose Emma Villain, by the first, Jeannette Kirkland by the second, and none by the last marriage.

Western Dist. ATREAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTJI JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This case had its origin in two suits which Elijah Montgomery, of Mobile, in the state of Alabama, instituted against Gilbert C. Russell, in the months of March and May, 1827, in the parish of Rapides, in Louisiana. The two cases were afterwards consolidated, and have been twice decided on in this court previously to the present appeal. 7 Martini JV*.

Western Dist. ArPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE FIFTH PRESIDING. This is mainly an action of boundary. The plaintiff sets out by alleging that he is the owner of a tract of land situated on both sides of the bayou Robert, in the parish of Rapides, having a front of ten arpents on each side thereof, with the depth of forty each way, so. as to include eight hundred superficial arpents.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, TIIE JUDGE ■ THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action on a promissory note for three thousand dollars, executed by the firm of Calland & Scott, payable to Hagan & Co., the first of November, 1832, with ten per cent, interest per annum. The petition charges that W. P. Scott had, since the maturity of the note, changed the firm into a new one, of W. P. & J. B. Scott.

Western Disx. APPEAL EROM THE COURT OE TIIE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE PARISH JUDGE OE THE PARISH OE RAPIDES PRESIDING. This is, essentially, a petitory action, and one of bornage. The plaintiff Sprigg, alleges he is the owner of a tract of land, having eight arpents front on Bayou Robert, with the usual depth, bounded above by lands of Fiske, and below by Thomas Hooper, the defendant.

Westehn-'Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES, FOR THE PARISH OF OUACHITA* This is an action commenced by the plaintiff by filing an opposition to the defendant’s supplemental statement of debts and account of the estate of G. Amberson, deceased, which he administers.

<p>Western Dist.</p> <p>ArPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF OUACHITA.</p> <p>The defendant filed a tableau of distribution, of the estate which he has administered. The plaintiff made opposition to it, because he was not placed on it as a creditor, for a balance due, on an account for two thousand two hundred and twenty-nine dollars and sixty-nine cents, with interest, and for the further sum of one thousand four hundred and eighty-five dollars and fifteen cents, the amount of a note of the deceased, which he holds. He also opposes the allowance of the sum of eight hundred and sixty-five dollars, to one J. H. Guise, in the name of J. Grifiing, as not being due, and as not belonging to said Guise. He also claims seven dollars, due on account. He prays judgment for his demand, and the rejection of Guise’s claim.</p> <p>The defendant pleaded a general denial, and that the sum of three hundred and sixty dollars had been paid to the plaintiff. He further denies the right of the plaintiff, to interfere in the allowance of other claims; and further, that this is not the proper suit in which to liquidate a claim, but' that an action for that purpose, should have been instituted. He prays that the plaintiff’s opposition be dismissed.</p> <p>Upon these pleadings and issues, the cause was tried before the court.</p> <p>The judge of probates, on hearing the evidence, sustained the opposition throughout, and amended the tableau accordingly. From this judgment the administrator, as defendant, appealed.</p> <p>contended that this was the proper mode of proceeding to litigate the claims set up by the opponent, which are proved, and should be allowed.</p> <p>2. In a concurso of creditors and claimants of an estate, they are all plaintiffs and defendants, and can litigate with each other, contradictorily. Saul vs. His Creditors, 7 Martin, JV. S., 433, 447. Ibid., 131.</p> <p>suggested an error in the judgment, which was corrected, as follows:</p>

westeun Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT Olí THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OP THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an action instituted on a claim for rent. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant (J. M. Jett) is indebted to her, in the sum of eight hundred dollars, due for the rent °f a tract of land, from the 10th of March, 1830, up to the time of bringing suit, 21st October, 1833.

WESTERN DlST. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE ' OP THE PIPTH PRESIDING. This is an action to rescind the sale and recover the value of certain property, as having been made in fraud of creditors.

WiiSTEitN Bist. APPEAR FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. This case was before the court at the October term, 1834. 7 Louisiana Reports, 395. When the mandate was sent down to the Court of Probates, the defendant made opposition to its being entered as the judgment of the court, on the following grounds: First.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE FIFTH PRESIDING. This suit is instituted against the defendant, as surety on the following promissory note : “$307 43. .

■Western Dist. APPEAL PROM TUE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. This is an action founded on a judgment or decree of a Court of Chancery in the state of Kentucky, for' the sum of one thousand five hundred and thirty-five dolíais and fifty-two cents, rendered against the executor of John Hall, deceased, who was at the time exercising his functions in, and was a resident of Louisiana.

Western Disx. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SJXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action instituted on two bills of exchange, of the following tenor and amount each, to render the defendant liable as drawer, and to recover the amount thereof. “Fitchburg, Oct. 14, 1832.” u Exchange for JJ1507 77.” “ Three months after date, of this my first exchange, (second of the same tenor and date unpaid,) pay tó Messrs.

w esters Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF TROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. This is an opposition, on the part of the plaintiffs, to the re-appointment of a curator of a vacant estate. The defendant, as curator of the vacant succession of Merriam & Boaddus, filed a provisional tableau of his administration, and prayed for the prolongation of his term for another year. The plaintiffs opposed the tableau, on various grounds, and especially the re-appointment of the curator.

WESTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action instituted by Henry Babcock, Charles Gardiner and R. Watson, as commercial partners, and holders of a promissory note, for four thousand five hundred dollars, drawn by W. P. Scott, payable to the order and endorsed by H. G. Williams and others, negotiable and payable at the bank of Louisiana, at New-Orleans.

WESTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This was an action by the plaintiffs, as a commercial firm, and holders of a promissory note, made payable to the order of J. M. Wells and others, and endorsed by him and them, to render them liable on their endorsement. The defendants severally pleaded a general denial. This case is similar to B. G. & Co. vs. Williams et al., ante., 394.

Westf.uk Dist. AITEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. moved to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that there was no service of the petition of appeal accompanying the citation. This was a fatal defect, which authorized the dismissal of the appeal. 7 Louisiana Reports, 361. moved for time to have the sheriff’s return amended; he expected the service had been properly made, but omitted in the return.

westehh Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. This is an action against the executrix of the succession of the late Thomas C. Scott, to compel her to render an account of her administration, and for a partition of the succession.

<p>Western Djst.</p> <p>APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING.</p> <p>This is an action for work and. labor, performed by the plaintiffs, for tbe defendant. They allege that they all three worked as mechanics for the defendant, between nine and ten months, at the rate of one hundred dollars per month, and boarded, and that their work is worth nine hundred and sixty dollars, for which they pray judgment.</p> <p>The defendant pleaded a general denial. He further averred, that true it was he had hired the plaintiffs to work for him, but that they had imposed upon him, by representing themselves as good workmen, when, in fact, they were not so; that they spoiled his work, fell sick, lived and boarded with him for four or five months, and he paid their medical bills. He annexes an account for advances and payments, losses, and damages, occasioned by the plaintiffs, which he pleads in compensation and reconvention.</p> <p>• The district judge, after examining the respective accounts of the parties, and the evidence adduced, gave judgment for the plaintiffs, in the sum of three hundred and sixty dollars. The defendant appealed.</p>

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OP THE FIFTH PRESIDING. This case commenced by an injunction. The plaintiff applied to the judge of the sixth judicial district, for an injunction to restrain and prohibit the defendant from acting as curator of the vacant estate of one H. H. Peebles, deceased, and also from selling the property of the succession.

Western Dist. AFPE AL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE FIFTH PRESIDING. This suit is instituted on two promissory notes, amounting to four hundred and forty-six dollars, with interest, executed by Margaret Crawford, “ as widow of R. F. Crawford,, deceased, and tutrix of her minor children.” The plaintiff also claimed two small accounts, for money paid on account of the said widow and heirs.

Westkuw Dxbt. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action to recover back the price of a slave, and a sum for expenses incurred in consequence of his unsoundness. The petitioner alleges she purchased a slave from the defendant, for the sum of three hundred and fifty dollars, with full warranty, and that he has proved to be unsound and worthless.

<p>When the court fails for the term to which the appeal is made returnable, and the transcript is not filed until the first day of the following term, it will be in time. /</p> <p>So where the appeal bond is only signed by the surety, it will be sufficient to maintain the appeal.</p> <p>The sale of a tract of land, by an act under private signature, which does not even appear to be recorded, will be good between the parties, when it is shown that the vendee has been in possession under this title for nearly twen ty years. Between the parties and their heirs, such an act forms full proof.</p> <p>When the court fo whiehth^pi turaabieTandthe transcript is not filed until the first day of the following term, it will be in time.</p> <p>So, where the appeal bond is only signed by the surety, it will be sufficient to maintain the appeal.</p> <p>The sale of a tract of land, by an act under private signature, which does not even appear to be recorded, will be good between ■the parlies, when it is shown that the vendee has been in possession, under this title, for nearly twenty years. Between the parties and their heirs such an act forms full proof.</p>

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an action by the holder, against the drawer and endorsers of the following promissory note: $500. “AlexandRia, 1st September, 1833. “Four months after date, I promise to pay to the order of W. P. & J. B. Scott, five hundred dollars, for value received. “R. F. SLOCUM.

WkstehN Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OP THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an action instituted in the first place, to rescind a sale or transaction, by which the plaintiff sold his interest in a commercial partnership to his co-partners, on the score of lesion, and to recover the one third of an undivided interest in a lot of ground which had been purchased, and the title taken in the name of the firm while he was a member.

Westbiut Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. , . This is an action to rescind a sale.of a tract of land, on the ground of lesion, beyond moiety.

western Bist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OP THE FIFTH PRESIDING. This is an action instituted by Bartley Cox and others, against the widow and heirs of the late P. H. Hunter, to render them liable for two debts of the deceased, contracted in his life time.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. This is an action against W. H. and D. Cheney, testamentary executors of Job Rowley, deceased, and testamentary tutors of his minor heirs, the plaintiffs, to compel them to render an account of their administration, to pay over any balance that may be in their hands.

Western- Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE PARISH JUDGE OE THE PARISH OR RAPIDES PRESIDING. This is an action to rescind a contract for lesion beyond moiety. The plaintiff charges that in 1829 he deeded to the defendant five hundred acres of land, estimated at five hundred dollars, being part of a league square, confirmed under a Spanish grant.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. The plaintiffs have appealed from a final judgment of the Court of Probates, homologating the tableau of distribution of the estate of Richard S. Jeffries, deceased.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM TIIE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF CARROLL, This is an action against the administrator of an estate, for counsel fees. The plaintiff alleges, that as counsellor and attorney at'law, he rendered professional services to the estate, of which the defendant is administrator, for which he charges the sum of five hundred dollars, according to an account annexed.

Western Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE SIXTH JVDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is essentially a possessory action. The plaintiff claims the possession of a certain tract of land with her improvements, together with one thousand dollars, in damages for illegally dispossessing her and demolishing her house. The defendant pleaded the general issue.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF TIIE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE ' OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an attachment suit instituted against the defendant, on the following promissory note, before it became due : $3700 38. “ New-York, September 10th, 1835. “ Twelve months after date, I the subscriber, of Natchito-ches, in the state of Louisiana, promise to pay to the order of Messrs.

West™ Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an attachment suit by the plaintiffs, who reside in New-York, ■ against the defendant, who styles himself “of Natchitoches, Louisiana,” in the. note sued on.

Western Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action to recover the amount of a debt due by the defendant, to one Gilbert C. Russell, which the plaintiff purchased at sheriff’s sale. The principal facts were reported when the case was formerly before this court. See 6 Louisiana Reports, 87.

Western Hist, APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP PROBATES POR THE PARISH OP NATCHITOCHES. This is an action instituted by the natural tutrix of a minor child, to recover its portion of its grandfather’s succession, which is in the hands of the administrator. The plaintiff alleges, that her minor daughter is entitled, by representation of her deceased husband, to one seventh part of the succession of her husband’s father, now in the hands of the administrator, in money.

WESTERN Ü1ST» APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OP NATCHITOCHES. This is an action by the under tutor to remove the tutrix of her minor daughter for malversation in office.

Westeiin 1)ist APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. This is an action against the endorser on a promissory note. There was no defence and no evidence in the record, except the note sued on, and the protest and certificate of the notary, that notice was given to the defendants. There was judgment by default made final against the defendant, and he appealed.

<p>WESTERN DlST.</p> <p>APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OP THE SEVENTH PRESIDING.</p> <p>This is a possessory action. The plaintiffs allege, that in 1835, they were in the quiet and undisturbed possession of a tract of five hundred .and thirty-nine acres of land, lying on the north side of Red River, embracing the greater part of section twenty-seven, in township six, range three, in the Ouachita land district. They further allege, that they have been dispossessed by the authority of W. H. T. and J. A. Bynum, both absent from this State. They pray for five hundred dollars in damages, and to be restored to possession.</p> <p>The defendánts pleaded as a peremptory exception, that the plaintiffs have already sued them in a petitory action, and cannot maintain a possessory one for the same premises.</p> <p>They also pleaded a general denial, and call E. M. Bynum to warrant the possession and ownership of said land, she being the person from whom the premises were transferred to them, &c.</p> <p>The .plaintiffs proved that in January, 1835, they leased the premises to one E. Hubbard, who was in the possession as their tenant, at the time of the disturbance and dispossession.</p> <p>A plat of township six, range three, &c. was also in evidence, which showed the locus in quo, as possessed by plaintiffs.</p> <p>Mr. Hubbard, witness for plaintiff, testified that he took possession for one of the plaintiffs, and had a surveyor along to show the corners of the sections of land embraced by the plaintiffs’ claim. That after he had been on the land eight or ten days, Mrs. E. M. Bynum sent a man and some negroes, who made an improvement about half a mile from that of the plaintiffs.</p> <p>There were several bills of exception to the introduction of witnesses, and title papers of the defendants.</p> <p>The cause was submitted to a jury, on the evidence adduced by the parties.</p> <p>The defendants had a verdict and judgment, from which the plaintiffs appealed. ’</p>

Western Dist. APTEAE FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES, FOR THE PARISH OF CARROLL. The plaintiffs allege that they are the heirs and' legal representatives, to wit, the brothers and sister of Samuel Overton, deceased, late of the parish of Carroll, who died possessed of several slaves and considerable personal property.

Western Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF PROBATES, FOR THE PARISH OF CARROLL. This is an action instituted against the administrator of Samuel Overton, deceased, to restrain and enjoin him from ¡proceeding in the administration of the estate, requiring of him to render an account, and praying that he may be removed for malversation in office.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SECOND PRESIDING. This is an injunction suit.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SECOND PRESIDING. The plaintiff recovered a judgment against the defendant at the April term, 1836, of the Iberville District Court, which was rendered by the judge of the second district, who was required by law to hold that term. On the 29th of October following, the defendant prayed an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTBICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. The plaintiffs took an appeal in this case. There was no signature of the clerk of the court appealed from affixed to the citation of appeal, although one had issued, and service made by the sheriff. moved to dismiss the appeal, because there was no citation according to law.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. The defendant appealed from a judgment in this case. There was no citation accompanying, or attached to the record, and none appeared to have been served or returned by the sheriff. moved to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that no legal citation had issued, or had been served in the case, nor had any original writ of citation been returned to thi? court.

<p>APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE , ' JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.</p> <p>Eastern Dist.</p> <p>This is an action against the endorser of the following promissory note:</p> <p>$2000. “Donaldsonville, (La.) Nov. 11th, 1830.</p> <p>“In all the month of March, 1834. I promise to pay to Mrs. Maria Stansbury, or order, the sum of two thousand dollars, for value received.”</p> <p>“FRANCIS A. BOND.”</p> <p>Endorsed, “ Maria Stansbury.”</p> <p>The plaintiff alleges, that when said note became due and payable, to wit, on the 3d April, 1834, it was presented at the domicil of the drawer, and payment demanded, and there being no funds there to pay the same, it was protested by a notary, for non-payment, and due notice thereof given to the defendant. - He prays judgment for the amount of the note, interest and costs.</p> <p>The defendant admitted her signature, and pleaded a general denial. She further averred, that she was not liable, as endorser, because the note was not legally protested, and that she was not legally notified thereof.</p> <p>The notary states in his protest, that on the day the note became due, he went to the domicil or residence of the drawer, where he found no white person on the premises, and the doors of the house fastened. He then protested the note, and deposited the notice of protest in the post-office of the parish where the endorser resided, enclosed and directed to her in a letter.</p> <p>The evidence showed that Francis A. Bond, the maker, died, and that Narcisse Landry, the plaintiff and holder of the note sued on, was appointed administrator of his estate on the 11th day pf January, 1834. It was admitted that the only demand of payment was made at the late domicil of the deceased, as stated in the protest. No demand was made 0f administrator, who was himself the holder of the note.</p> <p>Upon this evidence the district judge rendered judgment foi' the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.,</p> <p>maintained that the judgment was correct. The demand of payment was properly made at the drawer’s residence, after he had died, when it is not shown he had left any heirs in the state. A demand on the administrator was unnecessary, as he was the holder. If the banker is himself the holder, it is sufficient for him to see whether he has sufficient funds. 10 Martin, 18, 645. Pothier, contrat de change, JYo. 146. Chitty on Bills, 268. Bayley do., 128. '</p> <p>relied on the case of Toby vs. Maurian, 7 Louisiana Reports, 493.</p> <p>argued and cited authorities to show that notice of protest in this case was regular.</p>

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PEOAI THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. In this case, the syndic of the creditors of Huntstock filed his tableau of distribution, and placed Reynolds, Byrne & Co. thereon, as chirographery creditors, for the sum of fourteen thousand one hundred dollars. They made opposition, and claimed to be recognized as mortgage creditors, and paid as such.

EASTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOUltTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE' JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT PRESIDING. This is an hypothecary action. • The plaintiff alleges that one John Nicholls was appointed his tutor in April 1819, and failed to render an account or pay over the amount due to him. That he obtained a judgment against his said tutor for the sum of seven thousand nine hundred and eight dollars, upon which execution issued, and was returned no property found.

EASTERN DlST. ArFEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE' PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is an application for a mandamus, commanding the • judge of probates to grant an appeal from an interlocutory judgment, ordering the curator of Durnford’s estate to render an account.

<p>Eastern Dist.</p> <p>API’EAI. FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OP WEST FELICIANA.</p> <p>This is an action of partition, instituted in the Probate Court, by a portion of the heirs of Margaret Coleman, deceased, against their co-heirs, one of whom (Charles Jones) is an absentee, demanding a partition of the succession of said decedent.</p> <p>The probate judge decreed a partition, which was unsatisfactory to two of the heirs, and they appealed. The appeal bond was given to John Traverso, and, others, without naming any other of the heirs especially.</p> <p>The appeal was granted the 3d of October, 1836, and made returnable to the third Monday of January following, in the Supreme Court. The third Monday came on the 16th day of January, and the record was not filed until Wednesday, the 18th. The next day a motion was made to dismiss the appeal.</p> <p>1. They contended that the record was not filed in time, and the appeal should therefore be dismissed.</p> <p>2. The heirs and parties, appellees, have not all been cited in the appeal, and service is defective, as relates to some of the others. On this ground the cause cannot be tried on its merits.</p> <p>maintained the right of the appellants to move for a withdrawal of the appeal, in order to have all the parties cited in. Code of Practice, 595.</p> <p>2. The appeal was filed in. time, being within three judicial days from the return day.</p>

Bastean Dist. The plaintiffs allege, that they are the heirs and legal representatives of the widow Pierre Decoux, the nett amount of whose succession, after it had been partially administered by a testamentary executor,,amounted to twenty-two thousand one hundred and nineteen dollars. That said executor had proceeded to sell the property of said succession on a credit, and was discharged after being allowed his full commissions.

EASTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SECOND PRESIDING. This is an action instituted by Richard Relf, sole syndic of Kenner & Co., against Thomas E. Ives, counsellor and attorney at law, to render him liable, and have a sale to him rescinded, of certain property mortgaged to Kenner & Co., which he bid in on his private account, whilst, as is alleged, he was acting as the plaintiff’s agent and attorney at law.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. This is an action on a promissory note for one thousand five hundred dollars, executed by James Williams, deceased. The suit was instituted in 1829, in his lifetime. ' A demand and failure to pay is alleged, and judgment prayed for the amount due on the note.

Eastehn Dist. APPEAL PROM THE PARISH COURT POR THE TARISH AND CITY OP NEW-ORLEANS. In 1834 the plaintiff obtained an order of seizure and sale, against a printing press, of the defendant Gibson, for an in-stalment of the purchase money then due, amounting to one thousand four hundred dollars. The defendant obtained an injunction against these proceedings, and gave James H. Caldwell as his surety in the injunction bond.

Eastern Dist. AFFEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SECOND PRESIDING. This is a petitory action, in which the plaintiff seeks to recover from the defendant, a tract of land on the Mississippi, in virtue of a sheriff’s sale. The defendant holds the land in controversy by a regular sale and purchase by authentic act, subsequent to the sale to the plaintiff by the sheriff.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT ' OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT PRESIDING. The plaintiff, F. N. Bissell, and his wife, who was formerly the wife of Abram Wright, now deceased, sue to recover from the defendants a large sum of money, which they' allege was paid, and also damages, on account of an eviction from a certain sugar plantation, by a previous mortgage given on the property by the defendant’s ancestor.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This is an action by the curator of the succession of Dudley B. Stewart, to recover from the defendant nine or ten slaves in his possession.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SECOND PRESIDING. This is an action against the defendant, as surety in a curator’s bond.

Eastern Di§t. APPEAL FROM THE JUDGE OF THE PROBATES FOR THE' PARISH OF ' WEST BATON ROUGE.

Eastern JDist. APPEAR PROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF WEST FELICIANA. This suit is instituted, on tbe part of the plaintiff, to be appointed tutor to certain minors.

Easteiot Disx. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an action, instituted by tlie plaintiffs against the defendants, charging them with sundry articles, as pillaster -chimney pieces, Roman cement, grates, and various other things, according to a detailed account rendered and annexed to the petition, amounting’to one thousand two hundred and seventy-nine dollars and twenty-five- cents, per the order of Mr. Clarkson.

<p>Where a steamboat is insured for a month, and sustains an injury under this policy, in a distant place, for which the underwiters are liable; and a second policy is taken out at the end of the month for another, making insurance against all risks, on condition that the damage sustained under the first policy be repaired, &c., and while repairing she sunk: Held, that the underwriters are liable, and that this was not a condition precedent, postponing the risk until the repairs were completed.</p> <p>Where a steamboat is insured for sc month, and sus-táins an injury under this policy, in a distant place, for which the underwriters are liable, and a second policy is taken out at the endofthismonth for another, making insurance against all risks, on condition that the damage sustained tinder the first policy be repaired, Sec., and while re-pairingshesunk: Held, that the underwriters are liable, and that this was not a condition precedent, postponing the risk until the repairs were completed.</p>

EASTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. This is an action against the defendants, to recover the sunn of nine hundred and thirty-four dollars and seventy-one cents, for merchandize sold and delivered to them.

Eastern Dict. ATPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OP THE SECOND PRESIDING. This is an action to recover the sum of six hundred and seventy-five dollars, which the defendant agreed to pay the plaintiff, for building a sugar mill. See the facts of this case reported in 9 Louisiana Reports, 174.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. The syndics filed a tableau of distribution in this case. The heirs of Lemonier made opposition to the tableau on various grounds ; and among others, to the mode of paying the privileged debts and expenses of the estate.

<p>Where a partner buys goods for another person, and pays for them on his own account, on receiving goods in return, with orders to sell them, and place the proceeds to his credit, the' partner may accredit them in the separate account ho has with such person.</p> <p>When there is but one debt due, imputation of payment can only be made to that one.</p> <p>The Supreme Court will not remand a case, and order a supplementary account to be filed, which was not asked for by the pleadings in the court below. Such an'order could only be made by an amendment.</p> <p>Where a partner buys goods for another person, and. pays for them* on his own account, on receiving goods in return, with orders to sell them and place the proceeds to his credit, the partner may accredit them in the separate account he has with such person.</p> <p>Where there is hut one debt due, imputation of payment can only be made to that one.</p> <p>The Supreme remand "a* ease and order a supplementary account to be filed, which was not asked for by the courtlnSSbelow Such an order could only be made by an amendment.</p>

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP PROBATES, POR THE PARISH OP POINT COUPEE. This is an action by the heirs of their grandmother, to recover the sum of about nine hundred and ten dollars, which they allege, the defendant, as executor and agent of her succession, illegally and erroneously charged for his commissions. The plaintiffs allege, that the executor had no seizin of said succession, and was only charged with conservatory acts, and paying some small legacies.

EASTERN DlST. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE, FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an application for a mandamus. ■ The defendant filed his affidavit, stating that he had called on .the district judge, for the first judicial district, to make a statement of facts according to law, and that he refused : wherefore, he took a rule on said judge to show cause why a mandamus should not issue, compelling him to make a statement of facts.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an action to recover from the defendants, the sum of two thousand six hundred and ninety dollars, for damages, interest and costs, on four protested bills of exchange, drawn by the plaintiffs on the defendants, in pursuance of a special agreement between them, according to a detailed statement annexed to the petition. The defendants pleaded a general denial.

Eastekn Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES, FOR THE PARISH OF WEST FELICIANA. ‘ This is an action on two promissory notes, executed by James Williams, in his life time, tó wit: August 14th, 1824, for one thousand two hundred and three dollars and seventy-five cents, each ; one payable the 1st of January, 1827, and the other the 1st of January, 1828.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SECOND PRESIDING. This is an action of nullity, to set aside and annul a judgment of the District Court, on various grounds set forth in the opinion of the court, delivered by Judge Bullard.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE PARISH COURT FOR THE TARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is ■ an action for the diminution of •price in the purchase of a house, on account of the defectiveness of its walls.

Eastern Dist. ATPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. The attorney, appointed to represent the absent creditors in this case, took an appeal from a judgment of the District Court, dismissing his opposition to the proceedings of the insolvent and the creditors before the notary.

<p>A tow-boat will not be liable for injury sustained by the collision of two ships she was about taking in tow, when the fault was in the manner the crew of one of the ships, which was dropping down stream, executed the mameuvre, and when the tow-boat was incapable of preventing the accident.</p> <p>A tow-boat ■will not be liable for injurv sustained by the collision of two ships she was about taking In tow, when the fault was in the manner the crew of one of the . ships, which was dropping down stream, executed the manreuvre, and when the tow-boat was incapable of preventing the Accident.</p>

Eastern Dist. AI'PEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. This is an action to recover from the defendants the sum of seven hundred and fifty-four dollars * and thirty-seven cents, the value of a boat load of coal, which is alleged to have been sunk and lost through their negligence.

Eastern Dist, APPEAL FROM THE COUItT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. The plaintiffs allege, that they are the legal heirs of Joseph M'Neill, deceased, who was a creditor of one Edward Brooks, of the city of New-Orleans, who made a surrender of his property, for the benefit of all his creditors, in the year 1813, and that John Poultney, Samuel Elkins, and Maunsel White, were appointed syndics.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE PARISH COURT, POR THE PARISH AND CITY OP NEW-ORLEANS. This is an action against the defendant, for the sum of four hundred and thirty-one dollars, which is claimed as a balance on a written contract for carpenter’s work, and for extra work done on a house.

Eastern Dist. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.

Eastern Hist, APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is an action on a promissory note, executed by one Paul Pascal, in the state of Virginia, the 2d of January, 1819, to the plaintiff, for five hundred add thirty-three dollars. Suit was instituted in June, 1836.