New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-05-05
COURT RECORD.
MONDAY, MAY 4, 1874.
Supreme Court.

Pfesent-All the Judges.
The following decisions were rendered:
BY CHIRP JUSTICE LUDKLING.
No. S34lO. Rudolphe F. Thurer vs.. Manuel C:
Blasco appellant.-From Seventh District Court Of
Orleans. The court had authentic proof neces-
sary for the order OF seizure and sale appealed
from. Judgment affirmed. with ten per cent dam
No 40l4. Blanc l. Legendre vs.. Wallace & Chop
pin, appellants-FrOm Fifth District Court OF Or
leans The motion to dissolve the seqaG;stra. a
not having been made, c. r. 27o; q. 462; A. 444;
"a $685. II B. 145; but the merits the decision is
No. 34l2 Peter Marley Vs. Daniel Edwards. ap-
pellant.-From Fifth District Court of Orleans.
Receiving parol testimony to prove alteration of a
contract expressly alleged by the plaintiff to have
been modified was correct Judgment affirmed;
No. Sis state vs. Hamilton MiGer.-From Thir.
Imprisonment for life on conviction OF MURDER
Judgment affirmed.
Insura nee Company appe lanJ.-From Superior Dis
trict Court. This case is identical with city OF
New Orleans VS.: Salamander insurance company.
rs A. ESQ., Act No. 81 of 1874 can have no effect on
this case which 10 ito collect taxes Of 1877 II it
is to interpret the acts of 1871 and 1872 it is uncon
stitutional because it trenches on judicial func-
No. 1850 New Orleans Canal and Banking Com
pany City Of New Orleans, appellant.,I:From
Nc. 3257. a. B. Grief vs. Kenner, Blood 4 Co., sp-
pellantsFrom sixth District Court o. Oh o genmd
of discharge by insolvent law. and the facts sus-
tanning the defendant the judgment is affirmed
well. appeiants.-From seventh District Court Of
Orleans. Judgment in favsr Of plaintiff annulleo
No. 3sS5. Factors and Traders Insurance Com.
pany. appellants, va. William J. JOhnsOn.-From
Seventh district Court Of Orleans The evidence
was held a. security ard purchased Of the defend
ant, Is A., 1856. Judgment for $500 o. the mort
st NJ s6 RFi Fleming Baldwin ct al vs. Scott Vat
son, consolidated.-From Thirteenth Judicial DIS
trict. The object of these suits is to nix bound.
aries ParOl testimony was admitted to prove
error in the description OF land, and objected to-
Ex neceesitatc rel parol evidence should be re.
eevsd to fraud n Or Benefit and
from mere mistake contrary to the real Intention
Of the parties; La a. AZ an ~ sn 10 led
No 3asl. James ]. OHara va. John Krantz, ap-
Seyen.h Stersred with defend
ants construction of a banquet with PERMISSION
of the city His contract did not embrace u, ana
he can not recover. The hardship ne suffers IN
the DEFENDANTS enriching himself ut his expense
is of his own seeking. Judgment reversed
No. 1894. Z. B. Everts 20. vs. n cu nu.an'
From sixth District Court of Orleans. Appellants
allegations that they had made advances on me me
evidence sustains the decision against them.
Judgment affirmed -
s Patrick IS sttb District Court Of
Louisiana. Judgment amended by reducing II 70
$3.50. uor,.o, t. r.
T. III Gardner ct al. garnishees and appeliahts.-
The answers of the garnishees were evasive, Iney
knowing who the defendants were notwitns.anu
inc ths misspellng of the name Judgment
No. 1862. Ferguson Clay, appellants, vs. W. B..
From Fonrth District Court of Orleans. Interven-
ton on attachment of property in the hanas OF tne
carrier. There can be no third parties
,without registry 1t is not necessary 10 discuss
the effect of the railroad receipt for the COT
ton. Judgment aunulled, cotton to Do sofa 10
satisfy Judgment for plaintiffs.
Justice Wyly dissenting
JUSTICE TALIAFRRRO
No. 52o State OK rel g. h as r psf,s
iudQe of BOssier.-Rule made Absolute, Ihe lo1'oA
IL No. sa48. Mrs. Josephine H. Ames vs. M ayland
sppellant1Frooam1 Sixth On anpele court
CVntin LUZ Wrs q Pckens VS. Thomas Friend, ap-
raIlant.-From Superior District Court Judgment
am Mr. st14. Lizzie c. Davis appellant, vs.. Bradley
wi,son l. Cs-From Fifth District Court OF orleans
Jpdgmseeanat State vs. william Kelley, appellant
pro ON T;rst District Court of Orleans. Judgment
of inprisenuent for fifteen months; on ormed
OF assam saa George W. Holt appel Vs. City o.
! NV Srieans.~From Fourth District Court OF VI
leans PLAINTIFF house, ao .n ,rocsed, anplied
to the redempsion of plantifs shinplassersa oo he
claims to lave deposited with the cry he ~ !.
cash for re iemption The evidence sno~s nS =,
| behind between S $500 and $l4OO. The mercy a,
| deposited was Confederate money 'adg"eh
| affirmed. -, Nav,
| No. 3S3a. Michael Duncan, Appellant, W, ,i na
Duncan.-From Eighth District Court 0. si ma
| Judgment affirmed, Mr.. Justice Morgan eAA1As Ns
| part in the case. - s,,.,
No. 5l22 State Vs. Sam Jolnson.-From SeVens.
Jadicial District. Murder. The continuance 81
| caqase is within the sound discretion OF |1as0
J Judgment of imprisonment tor Life afnLmed'
1 No s093 Mrs. Elise Labaure Vs. Mrs. Ems.
woolfolk.-From Fifth Judicial District 'udsmen
/ affirmed. NJ.
| No 49I3 State vs.. Joseph Wilson.-Arson Frol
| R;rst District Court Of Orleans. Judgment OF In
| prisonment for life affirmed.
i No 34s9. g. L. Langdon Vs. New Orleans insu,
.nce Association appenant.-Rrom Fourth Dissxic