4 Mart. (N.S.)
Volume 4 — Martin's Louisiana Term Reports, New Series (1821–1830)
165 opinions
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 1Chartres v. Cairnes (1825)
<p>Arpe u, from the court of the first district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 4Lewis v. Petayvin (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 10Johnson v. Inerarity (1825)
<p>When the Hiake«»tSto mustbejiidg-SiornonsuST ;</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 21Villere v. Armstrong (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 26Sacerdotte v. Matossy (1825)
<p>No person lias such an interest in the renewal of a license to keep a gambling house as may be the object of a contract.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 29Moulon v. His Creditors (1825)
<p>ofSTusSlent ⅛««4 tobepiacedorf balance!1 f°rtht</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 32Dennis v. Durnford (1825)
<p>Au inimbi-tant of the city .lean!,'cannot be eourt'of pro-Batonltenge1, ?hathheSwa?!ex--.eased person, was imder government, foreftefom-* BatoaRouge,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 34Shelmerdine v. Duffy (1825)
The defendant is suet} as endorser of a bill of exchange, of which ° ' the plaintiff is the drawer. It is a ice 11 estab-1 Ijghed rule of Jaw, that, subsequent endorsers ' 1 cann0*- 6ued by any prior parties, urdes--under special circumstances, which must be full;, stated; Chitty on bilk, ed. 1821. 4 Durnford and East, 479, Bishop vs. Hayward. Now, unless those special circumstances have been stated, the plaintiff must fail in his action.
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 42Pilie v. Mollere (1825)
<p>If the fractions of a dollar be expressed in figures, the note is not therefore void, but theifaetions will be rejected.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 45Farrar v. M'Cutcheon (1825)
<p>A devise to the mother for liie, remainder : to the children, in equal parts,, to be held for the survivors, down to the last, in the event of death . before marriage or without issue, isa substitution, which the law reprobates.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 51Hyde v. Henry (1825)
<p>Ywrat. from tlie court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 53Dow v. Shimmin (1825)
<p>It a written synallagmatic contract be deposited in the hands of a thirc party, who gives to each of the contracting parties a receipt for it, it will be read in evidence, at least as ahe-ginning of proof.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 56Bainbridge v. Clay (1825)
<p>i'he creditors of the assignor may seize the debt assigned, as long as the assignee has not given notice of the assignment to 1he debtor.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 67M'Coy v. His Creditors (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of she first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 68Changeur v. Gravier's Heirs (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 72Davenport's Heirs v. Fortier (1825)
<p>A bill of exceptions will no! be considered, if circumstances render its examination of no importance in the cause.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 73Flower v. Arnaud (1825)
<p>ciafm°⅛ a,til ^íd^may iL^urehaler whatever he .. his cre-dinr mnbre the «ale.</p> <p>The treaau-rer may with-hoidfromaper-son, to whom the legislature has made an allowance, the amount of his taxes, for lector has re-aeSuiteioiie beasurer'</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 75Pilie v. Dreux's Syndics (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court oí the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 76Freret v. Dreux's Syndics (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 77Williams v. Spencer (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the third district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 79Wickner v. Croghan (1825)
<p>4 payment when not applied by the payor, must be imputed to the di’bt he had the prettied in-tercrl to di?* chargf</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 80Poutz v. Louisiana State Insurance Co. (1825)
<p>m march ,>f French SpamYn110¾>, war oí'France pt'cúii.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 83Montillet v. Shiff (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court oí the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 87Louisiana State Bank v. Ellery (1825)
<p>Notice of the protest of a note, ⅛ improperly given to an attorney, with special powers, which do not autho-rise him to re - ceive such a notice,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 89Richards v. Morgan (1825)
<p>¾0 appeal lies from a .judgment gir en against a sheriff, on account of his having taken insufficient bail when less than $300 is claimed from him, although more was demanded from the defendant in the original suit.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 91Dubreuil v. Soulie (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the third district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 93Dubreuil v. Soulie (1825)
<p>Pr-s'i- AC Irom the court of the third district,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 95Mark v. Bowers (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 99Moosa v. Allain (1825)
<p>Appeal from the court of the fourth district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 103Goodwin v. Chesneau (1825)
<p>A party who has made a cession 0i-his goods, cnTto^Vn/tñ Judgment‘ j</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 105Findley v. Breedlove (1826)
<p>⅛ party ⅛ whom the legal title is vested, sue.⅛8 r‘shtto</p> <p>debtf cannofbe by against an individual member</p> <p>Damages on the warranty of g00ds sold, ⅛ not confined to the pVke of</p> <p>agent cipal may set the contract aside, but he cannot enforce it, according to his instructions to the agent*</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 116Morgan v. Furst (1826)
<p>If property attached, be ve-leased on bond, they who give the bond cannot afterwards plead that the goods' sheriff had no right in the</p> <p>In whatever himself, he is bound. pea¿sa ”anbNj</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 123Copelle v. Dalton (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orieans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 125Laporte v. Landry (1826)
<p>a certificate of protest is not good, unless it states io what post-office the notice wa* put,</p> <p>a waiver of the want of notice cannot ⅛ inferred,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 127Richardson v. Debuys & Longer (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 132Randall v. Bayon (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 134Davis v. Taylor (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 136Litchworth v. Bartells (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the eighth district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 138Le Breton v. Morgan (1826)
<p>a law impos-íng a tax on a particular parish ; the object of which, ⅛ the payment of a debt due by the £w¿°ontdreac¿“£ ‘,h0^dMnstlt“tl0n</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 145Nolan v. Rogers (1826)
<p>receipt of an attorney at law for money received on a c|aim pu' in«° his hands for collection, ⅛ binding on his client; but be own note ⅛ pay</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 147Montamat v. Debon (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 154Balfour v. Chew (1826)
<p>Parol evidence cannot be received from a purchaser at sheriff’s sale, to show the property was worth less than the conveyance expresses he was to give for it.</p> <p>A promise to release a mortgage, is not a release of it.</p> <p>Unless property sold by a sheriff brings more than the amount of the previous mortgages, there is no sale.</p> <p>A bid at a sheriff’s sale, is a bid for the absolute value, and when it is incumbered, is not a bid over and above the in-cumbrances.</p> <p>But this bid may be made for the entire value, with the obligation to pay the mortgage ; or for the value above the mortgage, subject to the prior incum-brance.</p> <p>Selling the land as subject to a mortgage, does sona!ly Il,lb!e‘</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 167Galloway v. Legan (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the eighth district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 172M'Micken v. Fair (1826)
<p>Awknranho 1r-'isfíí's agaihst his own interest ⅛ competent.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 174Canfield v. Maher (1826)
<p>insolvent’s books not good evidence in an action between creditors.</p> <p>A payment made on the eve of bankruptcy, out of the usual course of business. is vo id*</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 176Williams v. Hooper (1826)
<p>Appeal front the court of the eighth district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 178Boyd v. Howard (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 181Dupau v. Richardson (1826)
<p>On a motion to junction thep^dpnac-cannot be ⅛?</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 183Cucullu v. Manzenal (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 186Bellievre v. Bird (1826)
<p>Due diligence must be used by mi to!gnd°oU* the residence of indorser will not be responsible.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 188Blanchard v. Ternant (1826)
<p>Suit for land may be brought at the domtcii of</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 189Corporation v. Paulding (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 190Pigeau v. Commeau (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 192Baldwin v. Gray (1826)
<p>The liability of partners on a contract made in this state, is governed by o«r |aws,not of that, where ¡the partnership was én- ' ;tereddo’to. ■</p> <p>A receipt to a debtor for his |?ar^extinguish-Nesyhe obligation ⅜ solido■</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 196Gray v. Baldwin (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 198Meriam v. Worsham (1826)
<p>¾⅛ co-partnevs who on the trial íeasé'Trom debt due to it, A partner who</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 200Simmins v. Parker (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 212Frique v. Hopkins (1826)
<p>Appeal from court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 226State Bank v. Hennen (1826)
<p>if a note be made payable at the house of ^ oiliri‘</p> <p>bnloí'ATiiaLe</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 228Henderson v. Beale's Curator (1826)
<p>Appf.al from the court of probates of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 230Treme v. Lonaux's Syndics (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 238Leglise v. His Creditors (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Oi leans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 239Dupuy v. Barlow (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the fourth district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 244Richardson v. Weston (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 246Parkinson v. M'Donough (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of probates of the parish and city of New Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 254Bird's Syndic v. Dix's Estate (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of probates of the parish arid city of Kcw-Orlcans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 256Cecil v. Preuch (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.’</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 260Herriot v. Broussard (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the fourth district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 267Shepherd v. Percy (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the, first district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 277Ory v. Winter (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the third district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 286Debuys v. Johnson (1826)
<p>The defendant on whom citation has been irregularly made, waves the objection resulting therefrom, if he goes to . trial without relying</p> <p>The acceptor of a bill of exchange has no right to go into the consideration between the drawer and drawee.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 288Davis v. Hampton (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 292Thorn v. Morgan (1826)
<p>Appeal from the district court, of the first district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 295Caire v. Bank of Louisiana (1826)
<p>bom* u>h°giw an instrument of writing or a deed of sale, is .bound, to subscribe and seal it, If a seal be noeessaiy</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 297Spraggins v. White's Executors (1826)
<p>Cmms iiavf the power ex °^‘CI° 10 causesv before references.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 303Lafarge v. Ripley (1826)
<p>a party inter- and anide*, answer, bmake instiu°re7nt°evi-accounting h°oc °f ⅛°</p> <p>C°be. *anda third™ir-¡Sceo/ht a!i-: den?/7’ P a Y</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 308Dennison v. Nicholson (1826)
<p>Whether pay-ner, acting m a •¿apárate capa-dty from the firm of which he is a member, be a pa-unent to the srm</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 310Wall v. Hampton (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 312Ferguson v. Flower (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district..</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 314Hicks v. Duncan (1826)
<p>itearf «™court! pswyisfatSTd Before ^notary VeriT suffidenüy au-theaucated by the seal of the notary. An attorney for an absent</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 317United States v. Hawkins' Heirs (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of probates of the parish and city of New-Grleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 335Jordan v. White (1826)
<p>Appeal from the parish court of the parish and citj of Nevv-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 342Williams v. Trepagnier (1826)
<p>a party who is not injured by a judgment,cannot procure its reversal in the supreme court.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 344Louisiana State Bank v. Morgan (1826)
<p>On an application to remove a cause to the U. States* court* e~ videnct must be given . that the defendant is a citizen of another state.</p> <p>The appellant may bring up either the original petition of appeal, or a eopy.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 347Hazard v. Boyd (1826)
<p>The partner not'my panned topJrchalemér-notauthoriseThe bon count!rSh*P ar"</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 352Gardere v. Foucher (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 355Parham v. Murphee (1826)
<p>The authority oí" an attorney at iaw> be disputed !lf* ac!s within the lirn-its 0l'his dutiesBut it makes no Pan of them *» swear to the facts on wh«ch an attachment issue*</p> <p>A power of attorney cxecut-ed before a jus-ticeoí me peace in another state, ⅛ not a record or a judicial proceeding, u«~ der the act of congress.</p> <p>Possession of note is prima facie evidence ot title to it, but not evidence the possessor is acting for a third party,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 359Duncan's Executors v. Poydras' Executors (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the fourth district,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 361Bailly v. Robles (1826)
<p>Facts com-monicated by the client to profession” the attorney in this profesional character, cannot he given in evidence by the latter, aUhoegh be does not receive a fee»</p> <p>If the point really at issue was not contested in the court below, and the evidence is not satisfactory, the supreme court will remand the cause.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 365Sloan v. Adams (1826)
<p>0n a ⅞“«'⅛-oft fraud, if (he JHr>- finrl forAe defendant, and the court cannot agree with them, The cause will be remanded</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 366Rieffel v. Boissiere (1826)
<p>joefnotiie’I-om 'ogatit.g anTi" entoiy.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 366Spencer v. Lambert (1826)
<p>An appeal cannot be taken from a decision refusing to sustain exceptions to the petition*</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 368Martinez v. Layton (1826)
<p>Appeal from the parish court of the parish and citv of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 383Herring v. Levy (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 388Lawes v. Chinn (1826)
<p>Husband joining with the wife in a suit, is sufficient evidence of his authoris-ing her to bring the action.</p> <p>If the plaintiff in execution, sends a writ to another parish, the district court for that parish has juñdiction to issue an m-iunction.aiid tiv the questions a~ rising ormt. .</p> <p>Ie ¿s0" ¿r, aui|oi*“y ¡^ñd. her bi|C'</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 391Kling v. Fish (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 399Williamson v. Price (1826)
<p>The owner of a vessel is re-?onsibie fortht? damage done by a board-</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 402Verret's Heirs v. Candolle (1826)
<p>Thfi defendant cannot allege the nullity of the title under which he claims.</p> <p>The mortgagee creditor may enforce his claim against a third possessor, by an ordinary action.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 404Degruy v. St. Pe's Creditors (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of probates, of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 411Clark's Heirs v. Barham's Heirs (1826)
<p>An ordet t0 record a will* enab!e a party to plead Prescr’Ption un* der it.</p> <p>A judg«ie!’‘ given on erro-,,eous ,evidence> is valid until re-Te™d-</p> <p>When proper-*y |s bfd ,}y husband & wife, which one of them has a title, possession foi-</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 416Brown v. Anderson (1826)
<p>The right of a on execution.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 419Hernandez v. Garetage (1826)
<p>New trial win not be granted tor the discove-douce, which by mighthavifbeen The validity made ⅛’¾ ⅛" siPP¡ win*" be tested by our laws, it those of that state are not proven;</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 423Lawrence v. Foster (1826)
<p>Amendment* should not be allowed, when they do not promote justice ofthe ease.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 426Chapelle v. Wells (1826)
<p>it is no viola-tionof an exclu-siverighttokeep persons’ without ° *</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 428Hepp v. Lafonta's Executors (1826)
<p>K a specific legacy is made ofVmne, and afterwards, but. before the death of the testator, a paymentismade cannot claim that the. amount of the note should he paid bytheexeeutors,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 430Schlatter v. Broaddus (1826)
<p>fachment ° duly the place of d-mion'</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 432Garidel v. Fogliardi (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 434Brown v. Saul (1826)
<p>a creditor has no right to m-terfere ⅛ a suit between hisdebtor^and a third</p> <p>Dilatory & de-clinatoiy pleas should precede answering onthe merits; but when there is a total want of cgiv disclosed by the petition, it may be taken advan» tage of at any Stage of the pro» ceedisg,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 439Lanusse's Syndics v. Pimpienella (1826)
<p>The plaintiff against whom a plea of recon-vention is filed, cannot discontinue.</p> <p>If an agent, whofis to be na id on condition that he succeeds in the business entrusted to hrnif. be dismissed without, cause, he can claim a sum equal to the trouble he has been put to.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 449Hennen v. Monro (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 456Livingston v. Waldon (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 462Turcas v. Leglise (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 464Williams v. Horton (1826)
<p>a donation oí slaves without estimate ,s</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 470Zoit v. Millaudon (1826)
<p>: Appeal from the parish court of the parish .and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 475Hill v. Morgan (1826)
<p>It is not necessary to the completion of the contract between vendor and vendee, that the article sold should be weighed in presence of the latter.</p> <p>Payment is not a suspensive condition of a cash sale.</p> <p>The right of the vendor to claim back the thing sold within eight days, can only be exercised when it is in possession of the vendee.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 481Eggleston v. Colfax (1826)
<p>An attorney, in fact, may bring suit in his own name, for the use of his principal.</p> <p>The amount expressed in the bond of a cura» tor is prima fa-cie that which is due the heirs,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 483M'Rae v. Bushnell (1826)
<p>Theconstitu-tSon does not au-thorise the court to take cognizance of any ease where the object ⅛ dispute is below $300.</p> <p>Whether the legislature cae confer the po^ er?—quere,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 485Harris' Tutor v. M'Kee (1826)
<p>The court of probates has not jurisdiction of a case where the heirs of a suo cession claim property from those who hold under a míe adverse to ’-them and ⅛6⅛ ancestor.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 487Clamageran v. Bucks (1826)
<p>A third party cannot intervene in a suit to plead peremptory exceptions on behalf of the defendant,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 489Malchaux v. Lefebvre (1826)
<p>Where pay-merit to a third Partyisthec0!1-diticm of a contract, the receipt from him is evi-betweer* the parties con-«acting,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 491Conway v. Chinn (1826)
<p>A judge cannot certify after judgment, that the record contains all the matters on which the case was decided, unless it appears it was tried on written documents.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 492Myles v. Miller (1826)
<p>pieas of pay-merit and want oí consideration a re not incon--t'-tp-it</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 493Naba v. Soubercase's Heir (1826)
<p>The judgment of the «felfees ««it win not be, ; reverse*. when the evi-dense leave thee: fact doubtful</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 496Baudin v. Dubourg (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 497Hicks v. Duncan (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 499Bushnell v. Brown's Heirs (1826)
<p>Appeal from loe court of the third district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 502Ure v. Currell (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the fourth district</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 508Delassize v. Cenas (1826)
<p>Appeal' from the court of probates of the parish and city of Nevv-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 509Donaldson v. Dorsey (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of probates of the .parish and city of New-Orieans,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 511Parish of Orleans v. Kennedy (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 514Tallant v. Thompson (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and . ,€jtj of Nevv-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 516Abat v. Bayon (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the third district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 525Dick v. Reynold's Heirs (1826)
<p>On a suit marshal's bond for fees collected, it is no defence that the plaintiff's claim against the United -lates is unimpaired.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 528Bedford v. Jacobs (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 535Taylor v. Hollander (1826)
<p>Appf,\l from the court of probates ot the parish and city of New-Orleans,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 539Marburg v. Canfield (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 543Berthoud v. Barbaroux (1826)
<p>Agreements ate to be eon-strueriaccording to the intention of the panics.</p> <p>Parol evidence may be give» of the payment of a note X ⅜⅛-dants. without producing ⅛</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 551Fluker v. Turner (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the third district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 557Destrehan v. Destrehan's Executors (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 601Ludeling v. His Creditors (1826)
<p>Opposition to ¡,etif"de H5;</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 611Babin v. Laine (1826)
<p>The third pos» sessor, who ™£*wh"° thceannof ad-^™xecuUonWT</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 614Corporation v. Paulding (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 615Akin v. Bedford (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court.of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 618Troppe v. Bayon (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 620Bargebur v. Their Creditors (1826)
<p>When the ce-skm ⅛ seeded and a syndic appointed, ihe insolvent has no po-.-⅞! to affect tin* lighrs of the o-endois who voted iru syndics a,|J !’>⅛⅛ the proof v .'.mo be-fcivthe court,</p> <p>The tableau of f.^tihiitioo cannot be homo-io^,tcrt tii; the c-cditc.b arc r\ted. ,‘ie. this nn the record,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 622Lafitte v. Duncan (1826)
<p>An appeal can-toa^afty who cunTáry°interest</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 624Franklin Bank v. Nolte (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 625Clark v. Oddie (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 626Jordan v. White (1826)
<p>The supreme the decree of the judge a quo, when the case turns on a question of fact, and Ws conclusion from the evi-ífestiy erroñe-0BS’</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 629Dreux v. His Creditors (1826)
<p>A mortgage creditoi does not ⅜⅛ rant, because the re-6⅛<" overlooked his mortgage,</p> <p>w ¡⅛ n«rt-gagor’s wife re-«ounces her right, she will be postponed to the mortgagee.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 632Astor v. Syndics of Saul (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 635Le Blanc v. Johns (1826)
<p>k a parU without on®,.be tfldl tu ptoceeu ing present, the jury is waived.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 637Ludeling's Syndics v. Poydras' Executors (1826)
<p>if the law, which prescribes of citing an insoi-vent's creditor, when the syn-dies ptesent the tableau, be re-peajes, and the proceedings are continued on to final judgment, without any oh-jectioi) below or in ⅛⅛ court, the error is waived.</p> <p>Creditors are cited to oppose the tablea», fay , publications, but to bring them ⅛-to court in the first instance, personal notice is necwsa.y as to those who re-¡¡¡⅜ m ⅛ parish,</p> <p>in ⅝⅞-<⅜-deans, publica--⅛0 ⅛ the »⅛⅞ „°⅛ may be resorted</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 640Brown v. Saul's Syndics (1826)
<p>If a creditor da™ to be paid by preference on the insolvent’s bank stock, pledged to him, be settled con-fcradictorily with air the other *e tableau ⅛ made.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 640Brooke v. Louisiana State Insurance Co. (1826)
<p>in a policy of insurance, the written controls the printed part.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 649Henderson v. Morgan (1826)
<p>a conveyance, to secure, at the eve of bankrupt-she ¡njmy oc others, is frau-duimt, and wilt be set aside,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 653Fitz's Syndic v. Hayden (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 655Littlejohn v. Ramsay (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 657Gonzales v. Sanchez (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the second district,</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 661Akin v. Mississippi Marine & Fire Insurance Co. (1826)
<p>The insured will recover on a valued policy* although the invoice cost of the goods be below the sum insured.</p> <p>If a voyage be insured to Key TPest and the Havanat and the ship unite-cessarily proceed to the last place first, chi is a deviation.</p> <p>But if she did so through bad Weather, and the voyage to Key West fail, a recovery will be had for a total loss.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 664Lartigue v. Duhamel's (1826)
<p>General expressions in a wisi are to be restrained by what precedes and tollowsthem</p> <p>So, a bequest of 4 $1000, my moveable estate, plate jewels^ will not entitle the legatee to all the moveable or personal estate.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 667Armor v. Cockburn (1826)
<p>Appeal from the parish court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 670Thomas v. Woods (1826)
<p>mJt'he ⅞"'® «Tse6; hT «S h JróbabÜ</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 676Fisk v. Fisk (1826)
<p>Appeal from the court of the first district.</p>
- 4 Mart. (N.S.) 681Brook v. L. S. Ins. Co. (1826)
in this case a rehearing was granted, and the importance of the case has induced us to print the argument of the counsel. Held: that if the parties, without intending to wager, fairly agree to estimate the property at a high rate, their agreement will be valid. Phillips, 306; 3 Binny, 205. In the present case, I contend that no fair agreement whatever has been made between the parties to estimate the property insured.