New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-06-02
THE COURTS.
Sspreme Court of Louisiana Decisions
Judgment In a suit Against the Mutual
Aid aud Benevolent Life Insurance

Judgment In n suit Against the Mutua
Aid aud Benevolent Life INSURANCE
Association of Louisiana Affirmed.
The following opinions were delivered il
the Supreme Court: e..
Jane Wetmore VS.. Mutual Aid and Be
Hseyolent Life Insurance Association of Lou
Isiana. 1t is ordered, adjudgod and decree,
that the judgment of the District Court b.
affirmed with costs. Taliaferro, j.
Urban Theurer VS.. Bernard Nautre at al
1t is ordered that the judgment herein b,
affirmed with costs. WHY, J.
G.. NJ. Bender VS.. James I. Belknap.
Is ordered that the judgment herein b,
avoided and annulled, and it is ordered
that there be Judgment in favor of til,
plaintiff and against the defendant fol
$500, with five per cent per annum inter
est thereon from the twenty seventh of Dc
sober, 1865, and costs of both courts
WHY, j.
Levy & Dieter, in liquidation, VS.. Dubois
Lowe & Foley-lt is ordeied that the judg
lnent herein as to the defendant, Z. Foley
he reduced to S20,656 So, and as thus
amended that it be affirmed 1t is further
ordered that the plaintiffs pay costs of this
appeal. WHY, j.
Gardanne Casenave VS.. Placide j. Spear
ct als-On application for hearing. Rehear-
ing refused. Howe, j.
o. B. Graham 4 Co. VS.. Howard q Hat
tier-It is ordered that the Judgment APP
pealed from be avoided and reversed, and
The unconventional demand of defendants
dismissed 1t is further ordered that the
plaintiffs. O. B. Graham & Co. have judg-
ment as prayed for against Charles Howard
aud Victor Halter, composing the firm of
Howard L. Halter, defendants therein, in
soIido, for the sum of 1858 81, with legal
interest from December |, 1869, with costs
Of both courts. Howe, j.
Rehearings refused
Mrs. George Wales VS.. Citizens Bank of
Louisiana.
GiasscOck & Moore VS.. William Wells.
Succession of Alexander Labry.
State of Louisiana VS. John Evans.
Jacob VS.. Widow Warfield.
State ex rel. Solomon 81 Simpson vs..
Graham, Auditor.
State ex rel. j. L. & E. IL. Levy, Klein
and others VS.. Board of Liquidators and
Fiscal Agent.
In the suit of James Wetmore VS.. the
Mutual Aid and Benevolent Life Insurance
Association of Louisiana, Judge Taliaferro
has delivered an opinion affirming the judg
ment of the Eighth District Court for the
parish of Orleans. We subjoin the opinion:
On the third of june 1870, the defendant
insured the life of Robert Hancock Wet
more, who died on the, ninth of September
following. This suit is brought by the widow
of the deceased to recover on the policy the
sum of $685., the amount insured for, and
interest on that amount, at five per cent,
from ninth November, 1870.
The answer admits that the policy of in
suIance was taken out as stated, but defend
ant AYERS that the insured party having
failed to comply with one of the conditions
stipulated in the policy the act became void,
and that defendants are not bound.
The judgment of the lower court was rem
siered in favor of the plaintiff for the sum
claimed, and the defendants have appealed
The condition referred to in the defense
reads thus: Said Robert Hancock Wet
more hereby agrees to pay into the treas
ury one dollar and twenty-five cents upon
the death of any member of the association
within thirty days after date of said death,
being notified thereof by publication in
one of the daily newspapers published in
the city of New Orleans, in English, Ger
man, and one in French for five consecu-
tive days
The company say that this assessment on
WetmOre, made on the decease of Joseph
Parissy, was due and unpaid until the ex-
piratiOn of the thirty days, at the end of
which time the policy became forfeited, SO
that on the ninth Of September, 1870 1.-THE
day of Wetmore's DEATH, the policy, by it's
terms and conditions, was null and void,
and consequently no rights of any sort |
arose in favor of the plaintiffs. The case |
turns upon the solution of the question, |
from what day do the thirty days begin |
TO run If the thirty days begin to run
from the first day of publication, the time
had elapsed before Wetmore's death.
" the commencement be on the last day
of publication the full period of thirty days
did not elapse until after his death. If the
time began to run from the first day of pub
location, why should the publication be re-
quired to be made for five days consecu-
lively! The reason for requiring five days
publication would seem to be that this repe
tition of the publication for five days would
be more likely to bring the parties inter
asted knowledge of the event published
than a single insertion in the gazette.
Taking. then, this construction Of the clause
the condition as correct, the
publication five times is to be considered
the notice, and to be deemed equivalent to
notice served personally. Therefore, the
asst day OF publication, and not the first, is
The period from which the thirty days begin
% run. 1t was upon this, and, as we think,
he correct view of the question, the judge
4 quo decided in favor of the plaintiff
1t is, therefore, ordered, adiudged and
lecreed that the Judgment of the district
'ourt be affirmed, with costs.
This court now stands adjourned over to
he first Monday of November next (1Sll
Sixth District Court.
Patrick Clarke, who was before this court
asst week on writ of habeas corpus, has
entered suit against Recorder Campbell, of
he Sixth District, for five thousand
ioilars damages, alleging false arrest and
Imprisonment. He had been arrested for
Ieeping hogs within the city limits.
fourth District Court-Jury Cases-Charge
10 the Jury by Judge Theard.
Judge Theard is kept quite busy now {
ntfa - ~
progressing before his court, and he gives
hese cases, many OF which involve i'm
ortant issues, his untiring attention. The
blowing jury cases were fixed for trial {
esterday: Boyle VS.. Hefferin Petkins VS.. {
Deblieux VS.. Douglas; Tu-
ane VS.. Yale. I
In the case of E. V. Fassmann VS.. F. NJ.
isk, Judge Theard read an interesting {
barge to the jury. The suit involves the |
n the corner of Clara and Howard streets /
ne defendant Fisk, is now in the Parish q
rison, where he is confined for eight DAYS t
,r contempt of the Sixth District Court. L
lie was brought into the Fourth District t
curt under a writ dd teStifcandUm The G
Dnfnement, 1t appears, does not agree with I
i'm. The following is Judge Theard's
large TO the jury:
Gentlemen of the Jury-It now becomes
" duty to charge you in relation to the
Nv applicable to this case. The plaintiff
les the defendant TO recover the sum of
1893 80 for rent of property corner of '
oward and Clio streets, in this city: also |
II the further sum of : 1913 30, sheriffTs costs
nd clerks fees in the suit of Z. V. Fass. /
ann vs. Connolly Il Hickock, No. q, 29i of a
,e docket of this court. The plaintiff Il
axes an agreement between Fisk and a
mself part of his petition, but AYERS
rat the condition therein contained in | d