Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

70 La. Ann. 78

Pointer v. Roth

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided February 15, 1867

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1867-02-15

<p>A PPEAL from the District Court, Parish of Iberville, Posey, J.</p>

Decided 1867-02-15

Labauve, J.

¶1This appeal is taken by defendant from a judgment perpetuating an injunction, restraining the defendants from selling three mules, four cows and calves, and carriage, and a buggy, valued at $690.

¶2On the 21st of April, 1860, the defendants’ sold to A. P. Marionneaux, all their interests in a certain sugar plantation, and the implements of husbandry and the animals thereon. Having obtained a judgment against Marionneaux for the price, they seized under a fieri facias the plantation and all the animals and movable property thereon, including the said three mules, cows and calves, carriage and buggy, the sale of which said John L. Pointer enjoined, alleging that he had purchased them previous to the seizure, and that they were his property.

¶3The District Court, after hearing his testimony, perpetuated the injunction, and the defendants took this appeal.

¶4From the testimony adduced in the case, we are satisfied that the four cows and calves, the carriage and the buggy, were sold and delivered to the plaintiff, John L. Pointer, and were in his possession; but, we are of opinion that the three mules, if they were sold, were not delivered to said John L. Pointer, and that they remained in the possession of the alleged vendor, A. P. Marionneaux, until they were seized. The testimony shows that A. P. Marionneaux had leased his sugar plantation, together with the said three mules to Renold, who was notified by A. P. Marionneaux that he (Marionneaux) had sold the three mules to Mr. J. L. Pointer,, and that at the expiration of the lease to turn them over to Mr. Pointer; the mules seized are the same that were leased with the plantation, and alleged to have been sold to Pointer. 'When the mules were seized they were in the possession of the lessee, and, consequently, in that of the lessor and alleged vendor, and could be seized by the creditors of the latter. Civil Code, Arts. 1916, 1917, 2243, 2456, 3390. 1 An. 59. 3 An. 462.

¶5We must dissolve the injunction, as to the mules, but are of opinion that no damage should be allowed, the injunction being sustained in part as to the cows and calves, and carriage and buggy, and dissolved as to the mules for want of delivery.

¶6It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be annulled and avoided. It is further ordered and decreed, that the injunction be maintained, and made perpetual as to the carriage, buggy and four cows and calves, and dissolved as to three mules; the defendants and appellants to pay the costs of the District Court, .and the plaintiff and appellee those of appeal.

/70/laann/78 · .json · Public domain