New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-02-21
THE COURTS.
Supreme Court Decisions.

THE COChTSs
Supreme Court Decisions.
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 90, 1871.
Rehearings in the several cases mentioned
below have been refused:
1912, Shepherd Va. Brooks; 1888, Lucas
vs.. Brooks 234l. succession of Kendall
2942, succession of Gable; 3O7l, State VS.
SimOndcllio; 1888, Tulane Va. Yale, Jr, a.
Co.
Decisions have been rendered in the fol
lowing suits:
State of Louisiana ex rel. Claudine Bene,
wife of J. P. Grandam, vs.. the Judge of
Fourth District Contribution for writ of
mandamuS to compel the granting of sus-
pensive appeal. Mandamus made peremp-
tory.
Francois Poche vs. Sosthene Theriot.
Sheriff, etc. and Pierre Laiche.-Appeal
from the District Court of the parish Of st.
James. Judgment reversed, and plaintiff
awarded 500 damages. Howe. j.
LuNen P. Norman vs.. Fielding. Edwards
& Co.-Appeal from the District Court of
the parish of Avoyelles Judgment affirmed,
with amendment decreeing legal interest
from July 1, 1862. Howe, J.
Bertrand Drogre vs.. Charles Moreau and
witc-Appcal from the District Court OF
the parish of Avoyelles. Judgment affirmed.
Wyly.
l.. II. Gardner & Co vs.. Wallace & Co.
Appeal from the Sixth District Court. Suit
to recover on bill of merchandise. judy
ment affirmed. Howell, j.
Borenger & Co. va. Oppcnheim & Hirscl.
Appeal from the Fifth District Court. of
East Feliciana. Judgment affirmed. Wy
ly, J.'
+. Y. Barnes VS.. II. Bidwcll. ct al.-Ap
peal from the Fourth District Court of Or
leans Judgment affirmed. WHY, j.
State of Louisiana ex rel. William Dur
bridge vs.. +. j. Pratt, President, ct al
Appeal from the Sixth District Court, par
ish of Orleans. The Slaughterhouse Com
pany appeals from a Judgment making per
emptOry writ Of mandamus, ordering it,
through it's President, to issue to the relator
certificates for over one thousand shares of
stock. 1t is ordered that the Judgment APP
pealed from be reversed, and the case re-
manded to the court qua with instructions
to the judge thereof to transfer the same to
the Eigh nth District Court for the parish of
Orleans. Howell. j.
A. j. j. Barus VS.. II. Bidwell. ct al.-Ap-
peal from the Fourth District Court. par
ish of Orleans Judgment reversed.
WHY
State of Louisiana ex rel. Simeon Beden.
Attorney General vs. Markey, Kaiser, ct
al.-Motion to dismiss an appeal.-Appeal
above decision we quote from the thirteenth
section of an act of the Legislature. passed
March ID. 1866: In all cases in which the
right to Office is involved, and an appeal is
taken from the judgment of the District
Court returning before Nle Supreme Court
holding its sessions in New Orleans, it shall
be returnable in ten days after Judgment OF
the lower court, and the Supreme Court on
the motion of either party, shall proceed
30 1.,-
ferrO. }.
Lucy G. Beard and her husband VS.. J. V.
Durable. Jr.. Sheriff 1T al.-Appeal from
the Fifth District Court parish of West
Baton Rouge. -Judgment reversed. Talia-
terrO, }.
George Keller va. Matthew Norner and
wife.-Appeal from the district Court par
sh Of Avoyelles. Judgment reversed and
case remanded:the court of the trstIintsance
Talaferro. j.
Charles W. c. Walker VS.. Andrew Cruik-
shank. eNecutor.-Appeal from the Ninth
District Court. parish of Rapide>. Jud.-
ment reversed. Taliaterro, j.
c. Yale. Jr. & Co. VS.. Stevenson 4
May and l.. Marquee & Co.-Appeal from
Seventh District Court. parish Of Orleans.
The plaintiffs nave appealed from the
judgment dismissing their seauestration.
and rejecting their demand for the proceeds
of thirty bales of cotton shipped from JEFF
ferson. Texas. by Wright. Harrison & Co..
on the order OF A. Nc Masters. to Stevenson
& MAY. cotton factors of this city. for ac-
count of +. Marquee & Co.
Stevenson & May having paid over the
proceeds Of the cotton to the sheriff, were
released. by agreement of the parties, from
further responsibility on account thereof,
and have no further interest in this ltiga-
ton. The proceeds in the hands of the
sheriff were subsequently released on bond
to the defendants i'll sequestration, +. Mar
queue & Co.
The petition alleges that the plaintiffs
heretofore had and owned a lot of cotton
which was on storage at Jefferson Texas.
in the hands of J NJ. & j. G. Murphy; that
afterward. to wit about October 4, 1865.
thirty bales of said cotton. valued at
$6OO0-the property of said rlaintitfs-was
to Stevenson & May, with instruc-
lions to turn the proceeds over to +. Mar
CrIeze & Co.: that said cotton was so
shipped. without their knowledge or con-
sent, and has been sold, and that said con
signces refuse to- deliver to them the pro-
ceeds On this averment they prayed for
and to be decreed the owners
of the proceeds. Judgment of the court
below. in favor of defendants affirmed
Willy, j.
Succession of ID. c. Hays.-E Il. Town
Public Administrator.-Appe from the
district court parish Of Madison. Judg
lnent affirmed. Ludcling. c. j.
jules Tuyes VS.. Avegno & Willoz.-Ap
peal from the Seventh District Court, parish
of Orleans. Judgment affirmed. Ludeling.
G.. j.
James Harvey. syndic of the creditor.
Samuel Sidle vs.. John Fuller, Walden and
his securities.
On the eighteenth day of January, 1862,
the plaintiff obtained from the Fourth Dis
trict Court of New Orleans, an order of
sale, and placed it in the hands of the Sher-
if, the defendant, to be executed. Under
this writ the Sheriff sold property, and re-
ceived the price of adjudication in confeder-
ate treasury notes, which he deposited in
bank. The plaintiff does not appear to have
called for the price until after the capture
of New Orleans by the Federals, in August,
1863. 1t was proven that the defendant was
willing and ready at all times after the sale,
to pay the currency received by him. The
suit was instituted August IL, 1868, to
make the Sheriff and his sureties pay in
lawful money of the United States the price
Of the sale aforesaid.
Judgment against plaintiff affirmed. Lu-
deling, c. j.
Eighth District Court.
Tho docket Of this court is now clear. and
ready for such business as litigants and
lawyers may have occasion to bring to it.
Another Mnndan,us Upon Auditor (;rahan,.
In the suit of F.. Montieu. Assessor and
Tax Collector of the Sixth District, vs.. the
State Auditor, Messrs. Denee and Filleul,
attorneys for the plaintiff, have obtained /.
mandamls before Judge Dib-
BILE, upon the State Auditor, compelling
that official to warrant for certain commits
siOns in making assessments alleged to be