The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1872-08-03

tiffS paying costs. .---.----..s.---....-
Simon Edwards VS.. j. II. Robinson;
j. Chaffe & Bro, MISUNDERSTANDING
ment affirmed. owe know of no law
which requires the proof (of a planting
partnership to be in writing" Judg-
ment for defendant for $435 IS, with
legal interest from January /, 1868.
l.. J. Willis VS.. j. Nicholson ct ais
Plea of res jut1icato sustained; Justice
Taliaferro dissenting.
Consolidated Association of Planters
of Louisiana VS.. j. w. Mason ct ais
A Judgment is not appealable, until
signed; and when appeal is taken in
open court, no citation is necessary.
Motion to dismiss overruled. ....
Where q mortgage was given in 1880
on land described as ga tract of land OF
five arpents front, bounding or adjoin-
ing the town of Monroe, with 40 ar
penis in depth, of which SO arpents
only are cultivated in cotton and corn,
the balance in standing timber;" held,
on exception, that the description met
the requirements of Art. 33O6, G. G.
The fact that the mortgage was in the
French language does not invalidate
it. Exceptions dismissed; cause re-
manded.
l.. M. b. Rind, Hus., VS.. J. l.. Hun
sicker ct ALA suit pending was COM
promised without the knowledge Of
plaintiffs attorney, who filed petition
praying to have his privilege as attor-
ney recognized on the judgment he
might have obtained. awe know of
no law giving an attorney at law a
privilege on a judgment not yet in OK
istence, and no law to compel party
to prosecute a suit to q judgment in
order that the attorney in the suit may
obtain and enforce a privilege on the
said Judgment for his professional SER
vices. The plaintiffs having comprom-
ised their suit, which they had a right
to do, and demanded its dismissal, it
was at an end, and there is no suit in
which an intervention can be MAIN
tained." Judgment affirmed.
j. j. Long VS.. Templeman, Curator.
Where Il surety is compelled to pay
for his principal in North Carolina
where the paper was made held, that
the laws of that State regulate the
period of prescription. Judgment re-
verscd.
IIoss & Durham vs. Il. u. Williams.
Judgment reversed; attachment dis
solved; damages, $500; Judgment for
5000 90, with interest from March L.,
1871, and privilege for Sl3O.
S. Russ, Tutor, vs.. T.. II. Woouham.
Judgment for the minor, Rosa A.
Williams, for $1,000 ...
Provisional Account of Executor of
Sue. of Iilcs--ssrhe creditor receiving
collaterals to secure his debt must use
proper diligence to collect them, and to
avoid responsibility must show the
causes which prevented him." Judg-
ment of the Parish Court of Ouachita,
affirmed.
JUSTICE WILEY.
w. w. King, on application for a
Monition.-In 1867, the District Court
of Bossier issued an order of sale of pro-
perty of Harrison, deceased. A mont
ton to perfect title was sued out, and
Carroll 4 Hoy excepted on the ground
that the District Court had no authori-
ty to holuologate 4 sale made by the
Probate COurt--that though the Dis
trict Court issucu the order, its juris-
dictioll has been transferred to the
Parish Court, which alone has the
power to issue Il nonitions The Court
dissents from this proposition; Chief
Justice L,tdcting, and Justice Ia!iaferro
non-concurring.
j. l.. &. Taylor vs.. David Pipes
solidatcd-Questior els the pur-
chaser of mortgagod property after suit,
or Judgment against the original mort
gagor, entitled to the rights Of II third
possessor, and can only be proceeded
against conformably to tho rule stated
in Articles GS and 60, G. P.:' Decided
Justice Howell concur
ring; Ludeling, G. j., and Taliatcrro,
j. j., dissenting.