The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1849-02-07
5lprenla GouGt Of MouisiaI1a.

| 5uprenta Gourt Of Touisiar,H.
No appeal will lie to the Supreme Court under Art 63
the Constitution where the matter dispute is fine
less than 5000 mposed by the Mayor of town, and tn
only question raised relates to the consutiOnay OF a.
act of the Legislature vestng judicial power in the off
| who imposed the fine.
| THE MAYOR AND TRUSTEES OF DoYALDsoNvILLE rs
Mrs. A. RICHARD AND HUsBAND-.7ppeakt from The May
crafty Court ct DonaidsOnrWe-No 1lss in the Supreme
Court. ErsTIs, G. j.. Per curiam This is appea
taken from judgement rendered by the MAYOR of Donald
sonviie for tieum of $50 for aedged nacon Of
ofhe town ordinances 1t brought before this unde
The article 63 of the Constitution stated by counsel The
ony question raised in this the constituonality ofaI
act OF the Legislature vesng judicial power in the office
who determined This question does not give this
jurisdiction CT the under that article of the COn
| tuition See Devron Us, Municipality No One. Annual
The appeal therefore dismissed with costs Dufall fo
plaintiffs and appeees ll4y for defendants and appellants
Where f. fa issued from District Court is levied or
property within the jurisdiction of the court of another
district an injunction be obtained from the latter
The buidngs erected by parish the of the State
in the administration of justice, cannot. while used
be seized sold by the creditors of the parish They
Egerton Us. Municipality No. Three Annual 435.
THE POLICE Jury OF WEST BATON ROUGE rs. J. P.
MICHEL AND V. BLANCHARD, SHERIFF-Iu Injunction
4ppeat from the Szh District Court, parish of Hest
Baton R0uge)-No. 1l9o in the Supreme Court. .EUsTIs
c. j.. Per The She riff on execution issued
judgement obtained by the plaintiff Jean Pierre Michel
against the Police Jury of West Baton Rouge the Dstric,
Court held in the parish of P0ine Coupee seized and
proceeding to sell the Court House and furniture the Clerk
office and furniture and the Recorders office and jail of the
Parish of West Baton Rouge An injunction was granted
b. the Judge of the Sixth Judicial District against any
further proceedings in relation to the property thus described
which by judgement of the made perpetual and
the defendants have appealed The defendants contend that
rendered by the District Poiue Coupes the Dc
Court at Baton Rouge had jurisdiction to grant main
tain the Inunct0n his question we consider settled III the
of liobsood Brown, Annual 323 and the
there CITED 1t being the duty OF the Police Jures of the
OF
the State with proper Tor Jurors and good and su
low that when the buildings are thus provided by parish
for the State aud used and occupied for public purposes
they liable seizure and sale execution agans
the corporation of the parish under the principles laid down
BY this in the case Of Egeron Municipality No
med WITH eane @ pa 1Em
and appeeas G. S. Lacey for defendants and appellants
In the of collision of ntees between the father and
minor child after the deth of the mother, the duty of
and the night OF relations 10 interfere all occasions in
the judicial proceedings between he father and the legal
representative Of the minor cannot be recognized.
SUCCESSION OF ODILE HEBERT, DECEASED WIFE OF
RosEMoND SIMoNNEAu DRozIN HEBERT OPPONENT AN.
APPELLANT-4ppeaLfr from the Fifth District Court. Par
ISL Of .ASSumptOn-No. 1859 in the Supreme Court.
EUsTIs c. j.. Per Curtain This appeal taken by
Rosemond Simonneau from decree of the Court of the
Fifth Judicial District, by which appraisement
ordered Of certain property which he owned with
his minor children who held in the right of their deceased
mother. The appellant had claimed to have the interest of
his children in the property adjudicaed to him the ap
prasemeEt made in the inventory OF the OF their
deceased mother ana famy meeting had ADVISED the ad
Indication The effect OF the decision appealed from de-
ieat tbs hdJ1dleall9n as demanded by the surviving us
ordered and another family meeting being also ordered
cation thus demanded by the father 1t appears that the
application for the adjudication opposed the District
Court by the maternal uncle OF the minors who has appeared
appellee in this Court. His right interfere party in
the proceedings contested by the appellant the
ground OF want OF interest," and that the undertutor the
only party competent appear for the snst the
father who was their natural tutor. The District Judge,
proceedings had and evidence taken, which
suited in the decree of the District Court from which this
peal was taken. We think the opposition ought to have
been dismissed its allegations not having been sustained
We do not undertake to lay down limit to the discretion
OF Courts in protecting the property of minors from spola-
ton The law gives ample power to Courts to effect that
oec ne interests are sale IN Inc hands
Courts and cannot recognize the right of relations
the father and the legal Of the children Those
who have taken upon themselves to protect the property OF
besides pecuniary and that their future welfare
pendant in great measure. on the good repue and we'll
being Of the father The law, in committing the interests of
the child to the instinct of parental affection has made the
best provision for their protection and in the of col
on OF interest between the father and child the duty OF
representing the minor contded to the undeuto We
led to make these remarks because the father charged
with fraud the opposition made by the uncle and be-
find ground for the accusation and believe
snd IN eae v a OF eE gsfi ne ay it e
that they had been left the law has left themtO the good
The adjudication OF the common property to the surviving
parent not founded the barren consideration of Pc
SELL the greatest good of the children 1t enables the pa
rent to continue the former business Of the community and
called upon to affirm reverse decision of the District
was not properly Composed and refused to homologae the
Although the nuty resulting from this nor
that the Judge erred in refusing their deliberations
in confirming the adudieaon it obvious that his decree
must stand in this respect As much time has elapsed
since the appaisement which made the Isl of Feb
del a he ntOfI
the district Court IS therefore affirmed with costs and is
missed -. Miles Taylor, for appellant Z. E. Maiho
for appellee.
JEAN BouDREAU Us. JOACHIM BERGERoN. ..4ppeal |
from the SrM District Court Parish of Lafourche Int
rior. RosT This petitory action. The judge
ment of the lower court reversed and judgement en
teed in favor Of the defendant. with in both
JUAN Y. LABoRDE u.s. CAIN & HEREFORD Appeal
from the Sixh District Court Parish Of Nest Baton
Rouge .SLIDELL. j.. Judgement affirmed with costs.
ELIZABETH LEBEAU, WIFE OF HoNoRE NAME u.s. BEN |
IAMIN PoYDRAs DE LALANDE AND THE SHERIFF. ftp
peal from the Ninth District Court, Parish of Pointe
Coupe. KING j.. The judgement below affirmed
with costs.
When buildings have been illegally erected on public
place. no damages should be allowed the owners for
their removal No silence lapse oil time can deprive
the public authorities of their powers over public places
Their nactiOn gives IN estate on suerance and nothing
MAYOR AND TRUSTEES OF THE Town OF TH1BoDArx |
IS. LOUIS LAMoUREUx AND L. " MAGGIoLI... ..7ppeal
rom the Fifth District Court Parish Of Latourche Inte-
or No 115l in the Supreme Court RosT, j.. Per
uriam The plaintiffs claim the demolition and removal
# certain wooden buildings, aledged to be the land
eserved by law for public road the left bank of the
'ayou Lafourche and within limits of their jurdic
The defence is general denial and prayer that
hould the ud cement be in favor of the plaintiffs the de-
endants may have judgement for $4,000 damages The
was tined before jury who returned verdict in favor
ears rent Of the building TO be emoved at the rate Of s
month On this verdict the court decreed that the build
be removed and that the plaintiffs pay Lamoueux s405
manages The plaintiffs appealed 1t is clear that this
Judgement stand The jury having found that the
buildings were on public place, and not considering
hem coming under the provisions of art. S5S c. c.
10 damages should have been allowed. 1t is contended
" the defendants counsel that the plaintiffs and the
Police Jury before them suffered the defendants and Others
place the levee nearer to the stream and occupy
ind buid the ground claimed without opposition
kind and that they bound by their implied
md by lapse Of time No silence length of time could de-
,rve the Cooperation its predece OF their
public places Their nacton the defendants
IN SNIFF andna thinn n