Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

8 La. 211

Zander v. Pile

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided April 15, 1835

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1835-04-15

This is an action on a curator’s bond, in the District Court of the state. The widow of the late John Pile, who died in New-Orleans, obtained the curatorship of his estate, and gave bond in the penal sum of three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars, with Thomas Copping as surety. The bond was taken and filed in the Court of Probates.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1876

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1835-04-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Martin, J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2This is an action against the principal and surety in a curator’s bond. The defendants pleaded to the jurisdiction of the District Court. The plea was sustained, and the plaintiff appealed.

¶3We agree with the learned judge of the First District Court, *213that it might be better, that the bonds taken by the Court of Probates from curators, should be acted upon by scire facias in that court, exclusively; being considered as recognizances, or conditional judgments. But a bond is the evidence of a contract, on which a civil action may be instituted, and we know of no law which authorises a court of ordinary jurisdiction to refuse its aid, to’ a suitor in a civil action, the cognizance of which is not exclusively given by law to any particular court, merely because it would be much better that the latter should entertain exclusive jurisdiction of the matter.

A curator’s bond is the evidence of a contract, on which a civil action maybe instituted in the courts of ordinary jurisdiction.The Court of Probates is one of limited jurisdiction, which cavmot be extended to any case not especially placed within its attribution.

¶4This court sees no good reason to change tbe opinion we expressed in the case of Elliott, administrator, vs. White. 5 Louisiana Reports, 322. Monroe vs. McMickin. 8 Martin, N. S., 510.

¶5It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that tbe judgment of the District Court be annulled, avoided and reversed; tbe plea or exception to the jurisdiction of tbe court be overruled, and that tbe case be remanded for further proceedings according to law; the appellees paying costs in this court.

/8/la/211 · .json · Public domain