New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-12-14
COURT RECORD.
SATURDAY, DECEMBER -, 1873.

E1F0t DlDtElCG AV0s~
INFORMATIONs FILED.
Assault aud battery-JOhn Brown.
Larceny-Jacob Hartman. Bridget Hur
lev. Lizzie DAVIS, Emily Trindie.
Breaking and entering store, etc.
Michael Hanahan.
Assault by wifully shooting at-J. )
Tanner.
SENTENCES.
Celestine Blot alias Ann-Larceny. Tw'
years in Penitcntiary.
ON TRIAL.
State vs. William j. Mccall, Dan Car
alias Buffer, and William Connors-ArsOn
Second District Court.
SUGGESTIONS of Felice Tonna, Leonart
Beyerungen and Edward p. Tileston wer
| opened.
Fourth District Court.
Judge Lynch has rendered the following
Judgments:
John McVlttie VS.. F. A. Bienvenu.-Judg
ment for plaintiff tor $1,000 so, with lega
| interest from December u, 1872, with spe
cial lien and privilege on the house and i'm
proyements on lot No. lS4 Bourbon street
| aud costs of suit.
Charles Donelly VS.. St. Johns Protestant
Episcopal Church.-Judgment in favor O
| plaintiff for $500, with interest at eight PEI
| cent per annum from August 10, 1872, anC
| 50 80 costs of protest, with lien and priv
| lege on said church building, and on tbt
| lot or lots of ground on which said charct
building is situated, and costs Of suit.
Hortense Werkle VS.. +. Huppenbauer, hel
| acknowledgement in favor of plaintiff
for 81, 500, with interest from judicial de-
mand, and dissOiving the community Of
acquests and gains heretofore existing be
tween plaintiff and defendant. The de-
PENDANT to pay costs of suit.
Mrs. Louisa Reich. wife Of F. Rodor, VS.
Hyacinth RoselIn. Judgment for the plain
tiff, perpetuating the mi JUNCTION and decree
ing the note and mortgage herein to be null
and void--the said nOte to be returned to
the plaintiff and the mortgage annulled.
Defendant to pay the costs OF suit.
Mayer Goldman vs.. Richard G. Bond
Rule herein taken on the first of Decem Der,
1873; to set aside the representation. is made
absolute aud the sequestratiOn Is vacated
and set aside.
Mrs D. Lester va. William P. Harper ct
al, submitted -Judgment dismissing the
petition and demand OF plaintiff and declar
ing her alleged title simulated and fraudu-
lent. Also dissolving the injunction with
ton per cent damages on the amount en-
joined and eight per cent per annum inter
est. That plaintiff, together with her secu-
rites, be thus condemned for damages as
aforesaid in aOlidO and costs of suit.
Miss Rose Mansfield vs.. Walter HeffrOn-
July 81, 1870, defendant executed his twelve
months note for $1,000, Endorsed it, and
gave it to plaintiff and secured it by mort
gage. July l, 1872, plaintiff sued on the
note, obtaining an order of seizure and sale.
An appeal was granted and subsequently
dismissed. August "a, 1879, Hebron, in his
petition, admitted d debt of $l4OC; alleged
fraudulent representation, which induced
him TO sign the note, with promise not to
force it beyond $liO0, and obtained an in
junction. Mrs. Mansfield alleged purchase
of property at sheriff sale for $500. costs
and tees, the prior light OF first mortgage,
taxes to the amount of $3.50 &c, giving
credit to Hetfron of $l553 o.. October
twenty-fOurth she was put in possession of
the property. new trial was granted.
Plaintiff and defendants wife, who managed
his business, are cousins. The plaintiff
cOntended that there was originally a debt
of $l400 in her own handwriting, an addi-
tional loan of $ll00, aao credit of $780,
The defense says the memorandum of $l400,
and $1,000, to be added with a credit OF
1885 IS, leaving balance of $l5l4 75
Heffrons wife, though transacting all the
business, can not testify.
In the second trial parol testimony was
admitted to show fraud as against the no.
tarial act ON which the $1,000 was paid and
the consideration of the note. Mrs. Mans
fields evidence is vacillating and contra
dictory. 1t is partly sustained and partly
contradicted by other testimony. She has
failed to prove the SlOO interest on $1,000.
She says she only received $500 back. she
is contradicted by three witnesses. She says
she never acknowledged $l40O was the
whole debt. Two witnesses swear differ
emily. Other discrepancies appear. From
the manner III which the parties have made
and unnade the issues, the matter must be
considered as an ordinary suit. Judgment
for plaintiff for $l5li IS, with eight per cent
interest from July 81, 1870, and costs. 4.
sixth District Court.
Judge Saucier rendered the following de-
cislou:
First National Bank of Macon vs.. B. B.
SHINES Plaintiff having obtained an or
der of seizure and sale against defendant,
upon conventional mortgage granted by
him to secure the notes given for the bal
ance OF the price of the property seized
under said writ, is stayed in the execution
of the same by an injunction, which de-
PENDANT insists should be made perpetual
on several grounds, ali of which were over
ruled at the trial save one. and that is, the
alleged imperiection OF the title to the
for which the note sued on was
given.
Defendant purchased the property mort
gagged at public sale, had by virtue Of an
order of the Second District Court for this
parish, on May ID, 1871, for the price of
$4,000. He complied with the terms of
the adjudication by paying $4,000 cash and
by furnishing his two notes for $4,000 each,
payable to his own order and by him in
dorsed, at one and two years after date,
secured by the usual mortgage on the prop
erty sold
He paid the note payable at one year, and
resists the payment of the other to plain
tiff, who is proved to be bona fide holder
OF the same, for value, on the ground above
stated and now being considered He does
not allege that he has been disquieted in
his possession OF the property, nor that he
has just cause to fear that he will be dis
quieted. No disturbance or apprehension
Of disturbance is distinctly alleged. 1t is
not perceived how be can be allowed to
suspend the payment of the note sued on.
Z. T.. 23J7, 8 A. 1853. 1t is true that he al |
Ieges that he has acquired a good and clear
title to only three undivided tourths of the |
property conveyed to him, and that he Can
not, for that reason, in justice and equity,
be compelled to pay said last note until he
obtains good and valid title to the whole
found that he now, for the first
time, objects to the validity of GER
tain proceedings had in the Second
District Court for the parish of Orleans,
which eliminated in solemn judgment,
the property from the very in
cumbrance ii. e., the rights OF the minor
Mark Lewis which he now urges for the
Of the injunction. Defendants
purchase was subseqden to the said pro.
ceedings and .jud ement. He made no OBJ
lection TO his vendors title then He com
piled with the adjudication. He alleges
now no disturbance or apprehension of dis
For these reasons the Injunction
must be dissolved.
1t is ordered, adjudged and decreed that
there be judgment III favor of plaintiff, the
First National Bank of Macon, and against
defendant, b. b. Simmes, dissolving the in