New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-11-19

instead Of the words F'oould not write,'
been used there would be no room tor
doubt as to their suficiency; but still the
expression 'tshe could not write" followed
by the one "she made her usual mark" in
dictates sufficiently the hindering cause, if
mention Of the hindering cause be required
by article 1872, in the case when the tesla
tor does not know how to sign his name.
We prefer to say that the words used in this
instance, taken altogether, are equivalent
to the declaration by the testatrix that she
did not know how to sign her name, and,
therefore, made her mark, as in verifcation
of her name, written by the notary, and ex
planning why she did not herself write her
name or signature, and that there has been
in this respect sufficient compliance with
the requirements of the law.
1t is therefore ordered that the Judgment
appealed from be reversed, and that there
be judgment in favor Of defendants, rec0g-
nizing the validity of the will in question,
with costs in both courts,
James B. Lewis vs.. Mildred D. Smith
Judgment affirmed This was suit to
annuI Judgment. upon the ground, among
others, that no citation or notice OF suit or
claim had ever been served upon the
plaintiff.
NJ. A. Kockham VS.. city of New Orleans
Judgment affirmed. This is an action for
damages occasi0ned by mob in October,
1868 The amount claimed is $1,000. The
city appealed.
Catherine p Talbot vs. Mr.. and Mrs. E.
J. Observation-Disclosures reversed, and in
favor of Mrs. Ann Kennedy, wife of e. j.
Newman, with costs in both courts. This
was a suit for $780, alleged to have been
borrowed by her.
State of Louisiana ex rel. Pierre Bague
| vs.. the Judge of the Eighth District Court
for the parish of Orleans.-The mandamus
| applied for is made peremPtory.
State of Louisiana ex rel. Antoine Dubu-
| clet, State Treasurer, VS.. the judge OF the
| Eighth District Court for the parish OF Or
| leans.-The prohibition in this case is made
perpetual The Judge of the lower court is
| forbidden from proceeding any further IN
| the celebrated case of Jacob Strauss VS.. the
| Treasurer Strauss is holder Of q large
number of Wicklife forged warrants, and
| claims excrbitant sums of money by virtue
| of the same.
Bramstein g. Bender ct ais. VS.. the Cres-
| cent Mutual Insurance COmpany.-The YER
| dict of the Jury and the judgment of the
| the amount of the judgment to S386l 66, to
bear interest at the rate of five per cent per
annum from May, 1866, until paid.
| Louis Haselmeyer vs.. William Ii. McLel-
| land-The plaintiff, legerdemain per
former, sued the defendant for damages
resulting from the breaking, Oy the MINOR
| son Of defendant, glass bell used by him
! in his performances. He claimed $500. A
jury rendered a verdict in his favor for
$1,000.
The Judge again, n refusing new trial,
expressed himself as not satisfied with the
verdict, but still refused new trial, and
| rendered Judgment for the sum found by
the jury, Defendant appealed. The Sq.
preme Court being satisfied that the bell
| did not exceed 500, has ordered the judg.-
ment of the lower court to be set aside, and
that there be Judgment for plaintiff
against defendant for $l0O. Both to pay
costs of appeal.
Gustava Soniat Dufossat and Theo So
| Mat VS. Francis j. Observation-Disclosures at
irmed. This is an appeal from an order of
seizure and sale
H. G. Browne VS.. Sylvester Bennett
Judgment affirmed. This is a suit for rent
upon a contract of lease and rent notes exc
cuted at the same time This was first
| found in favor of the plaintiff, and the de-
| PENDANT appealed,
John A. Florat VS.. II. n. McCrea,-Judg-
ment affirmed. This was a suit based on
! the want of consideration for certain notes.
| Decisions will be rendered on the second
| Of December next.