New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-01-24

side, and, by upsetting lamp IN her texas
caught fire and became almost total loss.
This took place seventeen days before the
expiration of the second months letting
and hiring, FOE which Blanchard had paid
in advance. The wreck sold and
brought $500, which KennisOn received.
This suit was instituted by plaintiff to
cause defendant TO refund $453 1873, being
the proportion of the hire of the boat for
the unexpired seventeen days of the second
month.
The answer is 3 denial Of indebtedness to
the plaintiff and unconventional demand
of $1,000, claimed as to the value of the boat
made less by $500, realized from the sale
of the wreck, the defendant alleging reck-
lessness and want of care on the part OF the
plaintiff and his employees in managing the
vessel, and attributing its loss to the I'M
proper management of the captain and
those under him.
Judge Synch. IN passing upon the ease
says:
In the charter party is the following
clause: The said steamboat shall be de-
Hvered to the owner n the same good order
in which she is now received, accidents OF
whatever nature excepted
Is the loss of the Annie Wagley an acci-
dent such as is contemplated in the above
recited clause, or is her loss the effect OF
rocklessness or want Of proper attention
on the part of those who bad her under
control at the time of her loss? | can not,
after the most careful examination OF this
case, regard the loss of the boat in question
as any other than en- accident incidental TO
river navigation Entertaining this view,
| see no liability attaching to Captain
Blanchard, the charterer and plaintiff here
in and it becomes unnecessary, for TINS
reason to pass upon the plea of prescrlp-
ton set up against the reconventional de-
mand of hennison, and hence judgment as
above stated.
Fifth District Court.
The case of Hallesley VS.. Simeon Beiden
was suit by plaintiff on promissory note
for $l0j0. The defense was that the note
was given without consideration to the
knowledge of plaintiff, who is holder, in
bad faith. In passing on the question,
Judge Cullom said the Code of Practice,
article COZ, says
A defnitive judgment may be annulled
in all cases where it appears that 1T has
been obtained through fraud or other prac
tees on the part of the party in whose favor
it was rendered; as if he had obtained the
same by bribing the judge or the witnesses,
or by producing forged documents, or by
denying having received the payment of the
sum, the receipt OF W hich the defendant had
lost or could not End at the time, but has
found since the rendering of the judgment.
An action SO annul a judgment may be
entertained as general rule II It be shown
that the machinery of the court has been
abused. in such case the court will prefer
to excuse an inadvertence rather than to
encourage fraud. 81 An. 48, J. o. Noyes vs..
Sigmund Loeb. In Beauchamp vs.. Nc
Micken, n. S. COZ, Judge Martin said:
Truth must be the basis of all judgments,
and where one is obtained on false dOcu-
ments made by the party in whose favor it
is rendered, the detection of the talsity
must entltle the opposite party to relief,
even where there is no motive"
This case before the court has the appear
ance of being fully as strong in the circum-
stances that warrants remedy as either OF
the two referred to. The article of the Code
in saving las he had obtained" etc, gives
instances in which nullity may be sued for,
but they are merely examples, and are not
understood as being the only cases in
which actions may be brought to annul
judgments.
In this case ir 10 possible that the ma
chnery of the court has been abused, and
should parties see proper to bring the mat
ter before it, in form to which it might
give its sanction, should feel that the
requirements of legal justice and the sane
tity of truth conspire0 tie necessitate tuS-
Their investigation.
As the matter stands, { can find nc au-
shority, express or constructive. that would
authorize the court 10 grant the present ap-
plicatiOn tor . new trial. and must there
fore refuse it.
There arc so.ne other authorities which
bear on, the same principle. New Series,
COG; > Louisiana Reports, l39, Eouisisns
Reports, I39; II Louisiana Reports, 100.
The ideas that permeate those decisions,
and the theory upon which shey are consid-
cred. is that there are cases in which the
conrt will give relief in actions for nullity
OF Judgment obtained by improper prac
tees, or where the court has reason to be
! Iieve that truth is not the basis of the judS-
ment GA which the action is brought
Sixth Districb Eouw.
the case of Chatfraix 4 Agar We. Price,
Hine II upper was before the court.
Messrs. Chatfraix & Agar claim the ven
doris lien on certain mOlasses sold to Price,
Hine s. Upper, and by them resold to
Messrs. John B. Hafitte & Go. Counsel was
engaged in examining the witnesses in the
case during the whole of the forenoon, on
the rule to bond. This is o case OF Sensid-
| cradle importance.