The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1849-03-16
Supreme Court of Louisiana.


Parish Of Madison KING j. The judgement of the
lower Court reversed and the remanded for new
trial. in order to enable the plaintiffs make one Riley le
gay party by having ad hoe appointed to repre-
sent him.
N. E. LARCHE, ADMINISTRATORS. as. VIM COLLINS.
appeal from the Tenth Judicial District Court Parish
OF CaTr0u... RosT 1.-the judgement of the lower
Court in favor of plaintiff for $500, with interest," was
affirmed. with costs
judgement not personal action and not prescribed
by ten years party who acquires property by inner
tance cannot be viewed third person. The admin
sao OF an nsoVent succession represents the creditors
and plea that his action to annul transfer of property
On the ground OF fraud cannot be maintained as the
estaof could not have maintained it, inadmissibe.
MILLS JUDsoN ADMINISTRATOR as. BRIDGET T. Con-
MOLLY .dpDeH from the Fourth District Court of Neao
Orleans Ellis Hon. Judge Sdell with consent of parties
declined sitting in this cause). Rosr j.. Per This
suit sequel to that of Bridget Connolly al u.s. Sarah
Connolly and husband lately deceased The administrator
the nsovent succession of the late Felix Connolly relying
On the Judicial declaration of the plaintiffs in the suit that
re property adudged to Bridget Connolly belonged the
simulated sale, now as that Bridget Connolly be cited and
that said property be decreed to belong the he
represents There was Jud cement by default, which, upon
proof OF the facts aedged the petition was made final
Inc opinion We have formed on the merits, renders it
res to noGe the bills OF exception found in the record
scpton and the plaintiff valves his right to have the case
Tsnanded under article 902, c. P.
, l. 1t is aledged that this personal action that
man Ten yeas have elapsed since sarah Connolly received
from me syndIc of Ho,kns title to the property claimed
q further alledged that the debts due by the success
SION OF Felix Connolly evidenced by judgements
and that they also prescribed under the same article Of
ne ne Code We have aso been referred act passed in
1910 on tne SUBJECT OF prescription providing that the time
occurred for 1t shall not be affected by absence from
The prayer of the petition is that the mmoyable property
ee described be decreed to belong to the succession of
This CLEARLY ana ea I aetn De delivered to
of ten Article 1903 provides that ali personal actions
those previously enumerated in the Code are pre-
judgement is a
TON ana does not come within the rule The debts proved
Tx Connolly, if he had any at the time of his DEATH
mat the property claimed belonged to him proved by the
judicial declarations of the defendant in the former case
There nothing the Judgment of the court in that case
lending to faslfy those declarations the contrary
forces compromise entered into between the parties the
i s as h heirs Of Felix Connolly in relation to the
to the defendant in full ownership that portion of which
Connolly and her title to it is by inheritance She cannot
therefore be viewed as third and the prescriptions of
1889 a50 442 and 345 G. G. can no more avail her han
they would avail Felix Connolly if he was alive
cannot be maintained because there fraud Felix Con
molly was party to it, and he would have no action him
that the plaintiff represents the deceased it is not So the
succession nsol'en and the administrator the
cedorS The case OF Gravler's curator Canaby's
ecno not applicable to this controversy The Judgment
is affirmed with costs Hoffman and Hasey for plaintiff
and appellee; Preston fo defendant and appellant.
An instrument not negotiable is prescribed only by the apse
liable for claim placed in his hands for collection it is
incu mbent the plaintiff to show that he had valid
claim, which has been paired or lost by the
or misconduct of the attorney
BLAssINGHAa SPILLER THOMAS GREEN DAVID
SON. Appeal from the Eighth Judicat District Court,
Parish Of livingston -SLIDELL, j.. Per The
plaintiff aedges that in 1889 he placed note in the hands
OF the defendant for collection and that the defendant has
made NO effort whatever to obtain judgment but has per-
mtted it to become exnguished by prescription that he
benefit and y neglect misconduct
has made himself liable for its amount The defendant
pleaded the general ISSUE He also pleaded that the plaintiff
had failed to furnish the evidence establish the
and has held it subject the plaintiff order He
deposited the note with the clerk of the the of
The note dated in October, 1888 payable at twelve
months and is not negotiable in its form, being promise
of the maker, Amelia GoIdon.
As the n,rument was negotiable was not subject
to the prescription Of five but of years. 1t is therefore,
not yet prescribed gs Prentice IL Rob- III, &c
posed extinction of the note is therefore erroneous
In an acton Of this sort It Is incumbent on the plaintiff to
lost by the negligence misconduct of the attorney The
evidence does not establish the existence any time
Of valid claim in favor of the plaintiff against Amelia
1t therefore dereed that the Judgment of the below
costs both aterston Tor plaintiff and appellee
Jones and Childress for defendant and appellant.
Where executor in the State of Arkansas placed certain
slaves of the succession in the of his suree
IN order to quiet their apprehensOn relative his mis-
management of the succession and the executor after
wards frauduenty and f0rciDy took the slaves out OF
the possession OF the suretes removed them into Lous
ana, and transferred them to third party residing
therein held that the suretles have such qualified
property in the slaves would enable them maintain
an action IN Louisiana against such third person for their
Possession but that the hire OF the slaves while the
possession OF such third person. must be claimed by this
succession.
JOHNSON, RALPH AND SLATER Us. CAMPBELL AND In.
BoDEN. Appeal from the Tenth Judicial District Court
Parish Of Carroll No. 1895 .EUsT1s c. J Per Gu
The plaintiffs the sueties of Samuel Campbell
his bond given in the State of Arkansas of
the last will of Duncan G. Campbell, deceased.
The plaintiffs it appears, having be alarmed at
the of the executor of the affairs of the sue
cesson entrusted him. and the Court of Probste under
which he held his authority having taken cognizance the
application of the said plaintiffs to be released from their
sureysbp decreed that Campbell should furnish other
ty further appears that in order to quiet the appehen
on OF The plaintiffs and before any new security given
await the further action of the Court of Pobates certain
wards Campbe frauduenty and forcibiy took from the
OF the plaintiffs the saves thus deposited and
them 10 lmboden, who has them in his possession.
The plaintiffs brought the present suit against Imboden for
verdict of jury rendered favor of the plaintiffs for
two of the slaves, Alice and Whey and $26 for their hire
rom the judgement rendered on this verdict the defendant
The occurrences which gave rise to this suit took place in
this State ''' "''''HS "'' "0''"''n 00unua'' Vi
The argument presented for the defence relates to the want
OF legal right TO maintain this suit the part of the
plaintiffs But appears that this right unquestion
the State of Arkansas where The succession is still open and
It's affairs unsettled and having been delivered them by
Campbell Tor keeping TO await the action of the Court
OF P0bates II to that their right OF possession
not be drawn question by spectator. Campbells
rights egaee him right the slaves to
this State and dispose of them the the success
sion which he charged to administer The other slaves
brought this State by Campbell have found their way
the line to Arkansas and permitting the depostary
to MAINTAIN this acton only fact returning these
slaves to the action OF the forum from which they have been
removed for purposes which court justify Slaves
being mOveahe by the laws of Arkansas the plaintiffs have
such qualified property them will support ih action
against party the position of the defendant. The judg
ment being for the of the slaves consider that
part of which DEGREES the possession TO the plaintiffs
rect but for their hire the defendant will be responsible the
succession to which the slaves belonged.
The judgment of the District Court decresng the defendant
pay The plaintiffs the of SOS or, as written two
thousand and eight dollars, IS therefore ed and that
de reeng the of the slaves Alice and Whey the
plain fs affirmed, the defendant paying the of the
District Court and the plaintiffs those of the appeal .Du
puy for plaintiffs and appeees Short and Blackburn for
defendants and appellants.
All acts hndrances, coming from the debtor which de-
prive the CREDITOR of the remedy and forum contemplated
at the time OF the contract suspend prescription.
HENRY BOYLE rs. WILLIAM MANN. Appeal from the
Fourth District Court of Men Orleans (Sraubridge
JD...No 1859. ROsT, Per euridm: This action
was commenced by attachment in August, 1917, on a
promssory which had been due than years at
the time. The plea of prescription. under Art $685. of
the Code presents the only question the cause Fhat
a.