New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-03-27
,ep-ion Of the last note. which : ne sut-

eep-ion Of the last note. which : tas sab
iec- Of ttls suit
TIE 1=ube-- Of the coupar! p.@a1 failure
q consideration that rhe Te--us AID c0ndi
-5o-s q tie lease- io- v-ich tie lg-e *:
yiveu. we're violated by liz City q Jefferson
AID -le eitT Of New ORLEANS. through tbei,
o-neer- and police. by attempting 70 enforce
tie aef Known as tat = slaughter hyase
sc-- Eblch went INTO eEeeT o. lie -rs. 0:
JC1e. ~
TIE court after careful e1au.ua-ic. O:
tte evidence AID tie Law applicable 70 iii:
ca.+. j: u opinion that the det-rda-ts have
utterly failed 10 establlsa -le:- plea 0.
failure Of consideration = a. 4 doe. 10.
syy-z- thai either the C.tE Of Je5er-ra O,
re c!ty q Nav Orleans mas grey i--e-.e-es1
VIII tie Sock Landing Conpso!.
seventh District Court.
Fa16eusr Bile - T. Smith, c. Bard. z.
t-ect-1cEssa. - als-Ieis vas suit. Lied
OF February g. lS1 !, 10 recover l.lfJl dam
sgeH- alleged 10 have D-+n caused 70 pain
IFS business I'D character BY tie puolica-
noe bv CtteECauls Of z card = which Inc
public wz. cautioned agalDs. making cvl-
tracts with plaiDtlE tor Danish s=ec-s- O
Norwegian eu;--arIs. ave--1g thai Ii vas
unreliable and uorTU.t JuGgmeI.
-as entered II :syo- q ct:-1ta-Ls- g Z
case q oC2-sU-t. yesterday.
Eighth District Court.
Tie following decisions we,e delivered "
judge Dibbie:
Louisiana state Lottery COMPANY V
Ro-rteI;e- and Jusc:-:zcL-Ic lis case
J-G e U5bble Las ordered that the defend
arrs motion 20 dismiss the exception IL
refused and the plain m motion 70 strike
or The answer and tie order -U- my r--a
IL granted.
= Z. Billings -. William Weber
/! I,la.a-zE applied for an Injunction 70 proven.
the 6@teuGant from interfering with hiIn II
The ossee OF recorder OF the Fourth District
TLe VII : refused al plaintiffs co=..
Crescent CITY Live Stock and Slaughter
house Company W james StaS o,6--In hi.
case Judge Dibble has ordered tie injunc-
tio1. u ISSUE. upon plaintiff giving bond
for $500. Plaintiff PRAYED for damages II
large amount, AID iOr q Trl- Of INJUNCTION
against defendant 10 restrain hin from
violating tie charter OF the COMPANY. De-
ienGau- slaUg htere6 beeves II the market
outside u The s.aughvertOCse erected " tie
plaintiff.
sixth District Court.
II the case Of ). W. Scott against Gen
era LoIg-t-ett, the counsel -oT plaintiff has
ruled tie General into court. retu--able 10
dav. 70 show cause WHY General Lon -s--eer
tina. he refuses either 70 point out the
WHEREABOUTS Of said property or 70 deliver
the same 70 IT, Sheriff. uOtEith staod.ug
amicable demand" II VIII be recollected
the Sheriff was ordered 70 take into posse.
sion tie Aforesaid hoEi-ze-.
Gerard Brandon ys. 7. II. & J. u. Alien
Can party De IEulcted IL damages on an
attachment bond. when the attachment was
properly and legally issued. but subseq 0en-
events neces-itated its dissolution
l. appears that tie plaintiff. Gerard Bran
don. bought from Hughes plantation. si--
uated il the parish OF Tersas. Subsequent
u Hughes removed 70 tie state 81 Texas.
a, tie end Of the war Hugtez had not con-
Piled with certain conditions II the act Of
sale which he had assumed toward nis ven
dee. Pending this suit brought against hin
bv TIE Mess. Allen on Ii. asSum p-ign 81
Hughes debt. Brandon brought action
aga-ns- Hughes, II order 20 SCI aside tie
sale By Hughes 70 hin, o. tie ground o.
Noncompliance or the part OF Hughes with
the condition o. the sale. 1be whole mat
y. was tired -ogether--he suits Of the d.f-
te-enr creditors whose debts Brandon had
assumed n the act Of sale. and Ii. suit
against Hughes; and finally. after two
year. litigation. the whole matter resulted
II a Judgment OF the Supreme Court. de-
creeiug that the sale from Hughes 70 Bran
don D. r-.cinded. the obligations assumed
By Brandon Cancelled. and Brandon 70 b-
-einstated IL the position he occupied BE-
fore he sale vas made 70 him By Hughes.
Brandon nov sues Oh he attachment
bond. He claims from the Ne-=rs. Alien
200 upon the ground that his property
was ov them Illegally and uaGciUus1y a.
rached: that Ii vas not their debtor. and
II clalL, all the damages resulting from
tn possession BIZ the >te-1- y IL p-a-.a-
rioD Il tie parish Of Tersas.
ILe doctrine : thai a attachment
v.5L gully .=-UeC can cJ- y cured BIZ =0LEe-
thing rtat has happened at-eTEa-d. !:
mus 1t properly issued a. lie moment:
:.C-..l. occurring E-P@eCle--lv can cure
tie 1-:1l issuance q al attachment. l.
: but al equitable coTol!a-y nom Ills that
Il a. lie uou-nt Of tie -a-u.-g q tte a.
tachue1t il vas rightly ,..1rd. AID --h>e-
C1e1t even-s made i wrongful Tat ought
not 70 -L-0w On the a.-a..tr- creditor -te
burden Of damages for q wrongful attach
lnen-. because the attacLTueI. was correct
l. issued Il the GGst p.2ce. AID Brandon
wa a NONRESIDENT.
The -wo cooditio1s required under tie
laws Of LOUISIANA :o- tie issuing o. al al
taCLE.Sr. were II existence a. hat moment
the attachment issued and the equity q
I'll potion : strengthened DT the 1act
ttE( = = OILY the act o. BFdIlo1 himself
WHICH could have DESTROYED the statQ quo
existing al that time. II Brandon Lad
never asked a resciss;0n Of the sale. i
2evec would have been Tesc!1deG. and IL
would be u this moment. under Il. assQIn =
ton ii The debt. OF Hughes. the debtor OF
the Ne=srs. Allen. Il i. therefore. his Own
act, which happened subsequently,. that
changed the relation existing between lin
and the nes-rs Allen at tie moment the
attachment issued.
~ that time Brandon vas a debtor 70
them: Brandon was nonresident: there
fore they had perfect Tgh- 20 cause lis
property 70 be ATTACHED il they desired.
They did 80. Subsequent events caused tie
attachment 70 be set aside But the al
tacbment issued for legal cause Al the
moment il did issue. I u. was al tie obi
CATION the plaintiffs assumed.
There must be judgmen. Il favor o. de-
PENDANTS.
Export. and Imports.