New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-01-20

Groves vs. Hasdesty, l9 A., 1856. Plaintiff
would also have failed if the bill had been
drawn against lawful money through laches.
Story on Bills. %. 32a5. 276: Gritty on Bills,
262; Parsons Notes and Bills. 800. JHdg-
ment affirmed.
No. Il 80. Succession OF Pierre Monstte -
From the Second District Court OF Or
leans. Jud gmeu. affirmed, J us:ce Morgan
dissenting.
By JUSTICE sALlAFEaEo.
Nc ASA. jacob, Hawkins IS. New o.
leans Printing and Publishing Companv.ap-
pellants.-Fgom the Fourth District Court
Of Orleans. Mot!oI to Gisin.s. appeal over
ruled.
No. 300. Henry Fge.l.en y.. Daniel Dair-
ex, appellant.-From Fifth District Court.
Orleans. Judgment: affirmed. with 500
dana gps for frivolous appeal.
No. 1913 +. G. Mahan Us. Accommodation
Bank. appellant Superior District
Court. Judgment annulled and reversed.
and defeudan. in injunction recover from
plaintiff and surety ten per eens q; the
| amount enciued.
No. 1864. j. G. Murphy W. McCa,:h- Il
Finnerty. appellants. Fourth Dis
! ,Iict Cont otOrleans. Appeal dismissed.
No. ooij. MR.. NJ, a. krai! vs.. Z. NJ.
liusha. appe.iant.-t'rom Slxti. Dls;iict
Court Of ORLEANS. Judgment affirmed.
/ NO. i'Ie. cdiileS (I:It1LtI. appellant. vs..
James Dezu.!ey.-t.om Fifth District
Cour: OF Orleans. Motion to dismiss ap-
peal Overruied.
No. 1916. State ex rel Gar.awai!e L.wi.
& Mile: vs, Judge of the Fourth Distrc:
Court OF Orieans.-Applicatio FOX man.
iamus. compelling the judge to sign bill of
exceptions. The Judge having shown sufii.
clent reason 10; Lot signing. the Gu!, IS d.,.
missed.
Ev JUSTICE HOWELL.
No. 2i31. J p. Harrison, appellant, vs. Is.
Their Barbara Meyers From Second District
Court OF Orleans. After judgment was reu-
dered and the appeal herein and writ O.:
error wa. obtained from the Supreme Court
OF the United States, counsel for plaintiff IN
suit and in error discovered that the certif.
cate OF the clerk OF the lower court was
| unsigned. whereupon he took a Iule on the
defendant. der counsel Of record. and the
clerk not now an office. The detendan:
could not be found, her counsel of record
refused 20 accept service of the rule, stating
that he had no ;uyther connection with the
| suit as attorney. the exclerk was served
but has made no answer. We can see no
good reason why the certificate should not
be signed as desired. Both parties blnit.
ted tne record without the signature TO thi.
court without any objection, and neither
party should now be dispensed, or allowed
10 take advantage of the clearly academia!
omissions 1t i. therefore ordered that the
rule be made absolute.
No. 30I7. Peter Marley IS. Frank w.
Seymore. appeliant.-From Fourth Dlstric:
Court of Orleans. Judgment affirmed.
No. 1925. St. Leon Destez VS.. Mrs. G. l..
Walker. appellant. Fifth District
Cour, OF Orleans. Appeal from an order OF
seizure, which IS ordered t. be amended to
exclude SIC 81.
Gillet De Eresse, From Seventh District
Court of Orleans. Appeal dismissed.
No. 303!. Rosina Prague We, Z. +. Wal
liche ct al. appe!Iant..-F From Fourl, Dis
trict Court of Orleans. Judgment affirmed.
No. .Gy.. State TX rel. Z. Merle. appel
liant. vs.. Antoine D1buclet. State Teas
Urer.-F.on. III. Superior Dstrc. Court
of Orleans. Rehearing to explain the De.
cree which reversed the Judgment OF the
lower court. am. commanding the defend
ant to pay the warrants annexed to the
petition GA. at any funds that may be in
the treasury. The court erred III granting
mandarin. when there Was no money.
Decree set aside. and Judgment of lower
cour, affirmed. Justice Morgan dissented
No. 1923. ChatiIsiX * Agar VS.. w. P.
Harper It ais. appsilants.-OH reheaIing.
ordered that the former decree remain IN
disturbed. Justice Morgan dissenting.
No. 1912. Patrick Gallagher vs.. John Nj
che! ct ais. appe.iants.-From Superior
Distrio. Court. Judgment: reversed, aud
Michel to recover three per cent on amount
epioined and $50 damages.
No. i9OS. Josiah Fisk W. police jury. JET.
ferson parish. Second Judicial Dis.
tr!c:. Judgment affirmed.
EY JUSTICE wYLS.
NJ. iiii. Succession Of A. II. DNez.--
From Second District Court ct Orleans.
J I'D gment affirmed.
No. 3i0i. Charles II. Davis. appellant. vs.
b. L. Authorization Fifth Dis:ric.
Court O: Orleans. Judgment affirmed,
1851. Albert K. Whitney vs.. Bernard
Saioy. appellant.-From Second Ju.licia!
District. judgment iissolying plaintiff S III.
junction affirmed.
No. 1919. Poste,a Bayou Navigation Com,
pany rs. William Durbrdge. appellant.-
From Fifth Dist'i:, Court OF Orleans.
Judgment affirmed. re iecting defendants
reconventiona! demand an! compelling him
to pay $500 81.
BY JUSTICE MORGAN.
no. 1897. Mrs. a. L. DeBiauc ". Firn.n
Levasseur. appe!lart.-Fro1E Second DIS.
tric. Cour. OF Orleans. Motion to disiuiss
appeal denied.
No. 1860. George W. Hunter vs.. sun Ma.
tuai Insurance Company, appellant. From
Fourth District Court. George w. Hunter
had been employed as book keeper by the
Sun Mutua! Insurance Company at the rate
of $500 per annum. He was elected ac.
! cordiug to the bylaw. at a meeting OF the
board of directors. in February. 1870. TO
serve for twelve months. but was dismissed
in April. 1870, by the directors. for no dere.
LECTION of duty. but merely to reduce ex-
penses. Judgment of lower court. given
in favor OF plaintiff, annulled and reversed.
as the bylaws Of the company provide
'.that the terms OF all the Offices of this
corporation shall be during the pleasure Of
majority of the board of directors
No. 4765. Marco Geranovich VS.. Citizens
Bank Of Louisiana. appeliant.-Fyom Su.
perior District Court. Judgment appealed
from reversed and plaintiffs aemand re.
.jected. Justice WHY dissenting.
No. 4622. State of Louisiana vs.. Dido
Baptiste and Francis Martini, appellants
From the First District Court OF Orleans.
The accused were convicted of murder.
The judge did not err In refusing a Goa.
tinuance until testimony was obtained from
Europe; in excepting the physicians from
the rule separating the witnesses, or in per
hitting Ward 10 testify, he having been
pardored of the Otfenses of which he had
been convicted. The objection that the
jury sat after their time expired is without
force. But when the jury returned for fur
ther instructions the court erred in refus.
ing to hear the counsel for the defense,
upon the judges charge on the weight of
circumstantial evidence. 1t was right that
the whole law should have been given.
New trial ordered. Justice Howell dissent.
ing.
No. 1869. Thomas L. me vs.. city Of New
Orleans, appellant, and Edward 7. Manning,
appellant, va. the city of New Orleans
From the Superior District Court. Appeal
on the part Of the city to resist payment of
Thomas Lynne's bill of $1,000 for services
in 1859 tax suits while said Lynne was
clerk of the Eighth District Court. Appeal