The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1849-02-23
Supreme Court of louisiana.


ion Of the Municipal Surveyor the original contracts
tractor during progress of the work which proved
to have benefited the corporation who receive and use
for the Contractor labor viii be Missile Money
the s%
creditors, who within the statute, exhaust the nnd
% e ske enc nos by
Iege accorded to subcontractors by the Lien Law OF
due for TN the VIC work and privilege thf fuiidnE
The former exists under the statute ITSELF the latter only
when the contract has been recorded The one enables
the workmen take rank the creditors Of the pro
a ss G h ts Of tire 1
unliquidated the sub contractors will be allowed
Allen o ps. wis, affirmed that Where the fails
to deposit in Court the real amount due by him under the
contract, he will be adjudged to pay the costs OF suit
MUNICIPALITY No. ONE OF NEW ORLEANS u.s. WIN.
BELL Appeal from the Fifth District
Court NeaO Orleans No. 1927 in the Supreme Court.
SLIDELL, j.. Per curiam The present complicated con-
ovey grew of contracts made by the plaintiff with
Bell for the erection of certain works. The contractor
neglected pay the workmen and persons who FURNISHED
materials and they notified their claims to the Municipality
under the of 1874 The Municipality the other hand
disputed the claims of the contractor Suits were brought by
the workmen etc. against the contra or and then this
instituted by the Municipality against Bell and the
creditors who had given notices. with which suit the other
actions were consolidated The Municipality stated what it
considered the amount of its Indebtedness and called upon
the creditors to lgate inter to its distribution.
The district Judge correctly stated the whole liability of the
plaintiff the contractor at $25, 60 portion OF this was
allowed for extra work not comprehended by the specfca
tons This branch of the submitted TO experts
and the court adopted their report.
N a the NH a poon
the ground that it was not embraced by the original
the Mayor BY virtue Of proper resolutions ounei
The absence of formal anecedent authorization by the
IL shown of
complicated nature not fully provided for BY the og
during the progress of the work in the aangement and
% m 's S
with beneficial consequences. The water works in conse
would have been According to the original specifications
the object of the undertaking was more fully aceomplsnea
cps ana at length was received BY the Munich
paty its ordinances show and has been for some time
the contractors labor nadmissbe The public has been
benefited and the subsequent municipal ratification as
The amounts Of the claims of the various creditors of the
are mot disputed BY the plaint who appellant
But the plaintiff contends that the amount tor which
this respect upon the question whether
made to the contractor we nd NO en
the payments in question made, the disputed nsta
aSs bs
delivered on the 4h June does appear that
It s c1une ' es Mae
that he works then s ess
gs Wills, decided Feb L. is4s and reported in full in
Only one Of the creditors Of Bell, whose claims were
eced by the District Judge has appealed Judsons claim
money to the contractor He obtained judgement against
Bell and made @ H. 5 not a W OF the
statute Of si4 He lad right against The plaintiff By
the nature his debt The l
under ,esS H. aPs a as the
creditors who within the statute his pretensons 10 par
ticipate in the fund were properly rejected
eSe upon The fund because the contracts were recorded
The argument contound the privilege upon the amount due
provision Tor the benefit of that class Of creditors fold
right of preference upon the amount due for the work and
secured himself privilege upon the building. by recording
his contract he must rank as an ordinary creditor OF the pro-
privilege which does exist But this does not affect the
% s ns
wokmen to take rank over the creditors OF The
privilege may exist without the former. .o,
Considering the unlquidated nature OF the plaintiff
this alton we do not recognise the tight of the credto
to interest except from the date of the decree establishing
Under the ruling in Allen rs. Wills. the plaintiff must
the costs Of the present. suit t.. INDIGNANT he 50 amended
as to allow e's the said Dana McGniss Drummond
ns6 to be @
from the date of the Judgment in the court below until paid
together with the costs of hi, suit in the court below and
And it is further deceed that the plaintiff do from
for interest to said creditors under this decree with night
Of exccuiona against said Bell when the sum shall be paid
accrued before their with this sHit be paid 6y
said Bell those of the suit of said Bell u.s. the sad
further decreed that the judgment to said JsdSn
be and fna inaH JUDGMENT De pas
amended be affirmed n1 anpe fqe
r. tho beneficiary heir Institutes an action against the
admnistraor of succession to compel him to render an
account and pay the assets i i no deenGe under
claims been presented to the administrator whoap
ponds list of them to his account when they have not
been acknowledged by him. nor ordered TO be paid nor
have suits been Brought upon them such creditors are
not entitled to notice OF the hers Application me ne
in SUIT and moneys wherein claims are pending an
court and authorizes the plaintiffs in such suits to require
security from the heir.
SARAH GRAVES AND HUSBAND Us. JOHN RoUTH, AD
M1N1srRAToR Appeal from the Ninth Judicial District
Court Parish Of Concordia No 124l in the Supreme
Court KING, j.. Per curiam The plaintiff, Sarah
Graves has instituted this action the sole beneficiary
heir of Dshaoon compel the defendant to render an ac
count administrator of the succession which has devoved
upon her and to her the baance appearing to be
in his hands, together with the remaining assets of the sue
cesson The defendant rendered his account exhibiting
demands of the still uncoected and debts to
large amour unpaid and in his denies the right of
the plaintiff be put possession until the succession shall
have been fully administered. Several oppositions were
fled and among the number was that OF the administrator
of Duckers succession who claimed to be creditor tor
large and prayed judgement for the amount to be paid
in due Of administration He also opposed the dev
cry of possession to the plaintiff pending the litigation upon
he creditor for the amount OF two promssory notes
both of which had been recognised by the a1mnisralo 10
be DUE To these the prescription of five years was
opposed The plaintiff having made no offer 10 furnish bond
and security for the claimed BY creditors, which were
still suit the District Judge deceed that the administrator
should retain in his hands sufficient TO pay the claims
then pending upon opposons to await the result OF the
litigation in relation them He also rendered judgement
in of Ballard for the amount of his notes. with interest
computed at eight per cent the dates of their respective
maturities. The administrator has appealed.
He contends that the plaintiff not entitled 10
nasmuch there remain claims OF creditors I'M
paid. These claims have been presented to the adminsa
tor and list of them has been appended to his account Dut
they have been acknowledged by him. nor ordered to be
paid nor have been brought them is also con
tended that these aedged creditors shou have been noed
of heirs demand be put that they
have claimed security before the delivery and that no such
notice has been given. The statute of 1928 ( loo 8l5
provides that the heir shall not be permitted to have actual
may suit to receive the proceeds Of any moneys Of
an court he previously gives good and sufficient secu
| rity if the plaintiffs in such suits require It,
The claims creditors which have been presented to the
administrator but admitted to be due and which have
never been prosecuted be considered as IN
sut or as pending court merely because the administrator
his account the fact OF their presentation and
LbotJ; ho1rxn aInt