Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

9 Rob. 28

Labauve v. Boudreau

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided September 15, 1844

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1844-09-15

<p>A vendor, without a counter-letter, cannot set up his own fraud and simulation as a ground to annul an act of sale made by him. Nor cap his heirs, who have no greater rights than he had. They cannot allege the turpitude of their ancestor for the purpose of enriching themselves.</p> <p>A judgment in a revocatory action annuls the act attacked so far only as it affects those who sue to. annul it. Those who were neither parties nor privies to the proceedings, cannot avail themselves of them.</p>

Relies on Gravier's Curator v. Carraby's

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1844-09-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1915

6 state decisions

2018441850186018701880189019001910decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Garland, J.

¶1This suit is brought to recover a slave named Michel, whom the plaintiffs allege that their deceased father, by a fraudulent and simulated conveyance, transferred to one Herbert Eastin about twelve years ago, which slave was purchased in 1834, at the sale of his succession, by the defendant. They show, that in a suit of Marie Angel Faustin, their mother, (but as whose heirs they do not sue,) and of another creditor of their father, the sale from him to Eastin was declared simulated, and, as to those parties, revoked, as being in fraud of creditors. Of this revocation the plaintiffs, who sue as the heirs of Francois Labauve, wish to avail themselves. The defendant alleges various grounds of defence, which it is not necessary to state, as we are of opinion that the plaintiffs are not entitled, on the allegations in their petition, to a judgment. When Francois Labauve made the alleged fraudulent sale to Eastin, it does not appear that he took any counter letter. Without one, it is certain he could not set up his own fraud and simulation to annul the act. His heirs have no greater rights than he had, and cannot allege the turpitude of their ancestor for the purpose of enriching themselves. 17 La. 118. 3 Mart. N. S. 48. Of the judgment in favor of Marie Angel Faustin and the other creditor, who sued to revoke the sale to Eastin, these plaintiffs have no right to avail themselves. They were not parties nor privies to those proceedings; and we suppose it is well understood, that judgments in revocatory actions only set aside the acts attacked, so far as effects the interests or rights of those who sue to annul them.

¶2 Judgment affirmed.

/9/rob/28 · .json · Public domain