New Orleans Republican., 1872-08-06

4
| against the original mOrtgagOr, entitled to
/ the rights Of third pOssessOT, and can only
| be proceeded against cOnfOrmably to the
! rule stated in articles G8 and 80, G. P -
| Decided afirmatiyely; Justice Howell con
| currngi Ludeling, G. j., and TaHaferrO, j.
| dissenting.
| Thomas Eaughton vs.. Dinkgraye sheriff,
! ct al.-"NO one will contend that insult
! cheney Of proof is a good ground to enjOIn
| judgment Why should it be in regard
to an order Of seizure and sale The law
! has not so provided" The plaintiff had
! no right to use the remedy of injunction in
! connection with his devOlutive appeal for
the purpose Of gaining the advantage of a
! suspensive appeal JudgmeSt affirmed;
! Justice TalialerTO cOncuTing; Ludeliug, G.
! j., dissenting
JUSTICE HOWE.
! G. g. II. King vs. +. Z. Bowman; w. G..
| Kennedy, warTantOr.-Farmer purchased
| land at bankrupt sale, and sold to Ken
! nedy, excluding warranty, and Kennedy
! sold to Bowman. Plaintiffs had jndcial
! mortgage against GraysOh, the bankrupt
and owner Of the land, at the time of his
| surrender. Plaintiffs proved their claim,
attended first meeting of creditors, and
voted for an assignee. Here their partici-
patton in the proceedings ended, and this
suit was to enforce their mortgage on the
At1l4Nb sAA LSAANAN-IlA " NJLfA SUI III
The court says: ;sThe plaintiffs were
clearly dispensed from the necessity of de
mand and notice, as provided by article 80,
=. r., by the bankruptcy Of Gray5On.' "A
demand on him and a notice to Bowman
would have been a vain ceremony, to which
the law cOmpels no one. u A, 2S8' The
fact that the land was once sold by an
assignee in bankruptcy does not deprive
the State tribunal Of iurildiptiCD
"An assignee in bankruptcy may sell
without petition to or order Of the bank
! rupt court any property of the bankrupt
encumbeTed in any manner; but when he
! so sells, he sells subject to any and all law
ful encumbrances, and can convey no bet
ter or higher interest than the bankrupt
could have done"
"If a secured creditor prove his claim as
unsecured, without apprising the bankrupt
court of the existence of his lien, he has
been held to waive that lien, relinquishiug
it to the assignee. But in this case under
form twenty one, for the proof Of debt with
security, the plaintiffs, as thereby required,
set forth with particularly their mortgage,
the property On which itbOre and the esti-
mated value of such property"
Plaintiffs did not abandon their mort
gage rights by participating in the election
of an assignee.
Plaintiffs mortgage recognized and rem
dered exCcutOTy. Judgment in their favor
for S57O6 80, with eight per cent interest on
S3168 % from April %, 1861; on $l8l8 80
from July /, 1862, and on $4l9 Is from Jan
uary !, 1866, subject to a credit Of $62l Il
October /, 1866. Bowman deereed to pay
said debt and costs or deliver up the land,
and that he have judgment for a like
amount against warrantOr, w. G. Kennedy;
Justice Howell dissenting.
j. q. w. Lewis VS.. DinkgTave, sheriff, ct
al.-"FrOm the evidence in the record we
are satisfied that the sale from Tatum to
the plaintiff was a mere stimulation. 1t is
therefore ordered that the Judgment be
affirmed with costs"
Alex. Pope VS.. j. B. Foster, Mrs. Foster,
intervenor.-This is a suit to enforce ven
doris lien on land conveyed, a part to the
husband and the remainder to the wife.
Judgment was rendered excepting the
wites portion from the lien. Held that the
lien was binding on the wife's share, unless
she had shown atirmatively that she had
purchased the same with cher paraphernal
funds under her separate administration"
Demand OF intervenOr rejected and lien en-
forced on all the land with costs.
MObley 4 Hamilton vs.. Tucker & Thur
mOnd.-Judgment reduced to 1851 -, APP
pelIee to pay costs
Mrs. NJ. A. COpley, tutrix and admins
tratrix, VS.. Mrs, d. Dinkgr&ve.-Held,t that
INC NtNislDAS u LllG NIlLLIlSE1OutL VI llb
Land Office and the issuance Of patents
Hereunder arc not res jlt6icatN. Cause re-
manded for further proceedings.
G. w. 9. Trezevant vs.. j. d. Holly
Cause remanded for a new trial; appellee
to pay costs.
State vs.. John ThOmpson.-Judgment af-
fTmed.
State VS.. Simon Pncips.-"We are con-
strained to think that the words with NAL
qtnpat 'JYrlo rVaal in
with and in addition to the word murder
are not Only one Of those unnecessary pro
liEIties whose use is dispensed with by the
statute Of 1905 (Revised Statutes 1870. sec
ton ~, but one Of those tautOlogies
which are no more necessary in an indict
ment than they are pardonabIe in literary
essay Judgment affirmed.
Ann J. Harvard vs.. Mary B. Atkins
Judgment affirmed.
Levy g. Bodenheimer VS.. Jacob Citron.-
Verdict set aside and judgment reversed
Judgment in favor Of the plaintiff
JUSTICE HOWELL.
J. W. Boswell vs.. succession of K. r. |
continuous Acknowledgements by
a deceased person of a debt can not be
proved by parOl' Judgment reversed.
REHEAEtNGs REFUSED.
Grand & Co. VS.. c. P. Cox ct al.
Ball, Lyons & Co. VS.. R. B. Lignoski.
G. w. Trezvant vs.. Frank Miles,
McCleaveIand VS.. Phelps sheriff, and |
Pipes ct tal.-cOnsOlidated.
H. n. Meyer & Co. ys. NJ. n. Grady.
w. L. Gushing vs.. George Robinson ct al. |
State vs. Samuel Kuhn.
Harris Harrison VS.. succession Of John |
Anger,
Caroline Bryant, wife, W. G. X. Guluspie, |
RETIEARINGS GRANTED.
B. NJ. Horrell & Co. vs.. G. W. Oliver,
Blanchin & Giraud Us. 5. Whited.