New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-05-22
COURT RECORD.
FRIDAY, MAY 81, lS1J.
United States Circuit Court.


J. A. Morris vs. city of New Orleans.-
Verdict for plaintiff of $53, ,OG0.
Same VS.. same-Verdct for plaintiff OF
$33.OoO
w. S Patterkin vs. same.-Verdict for
plaintiff Of $4,000.
w. Casey, receiver vs. J. r. Green and
T.. II. Chase.-Eerdict for plaintiff of
$lJ93 95
+. F. Case. receiver, va. p. II. Morgan
Verdict for plaintiff OF $1,000
Same Va. O. Canton.-Nerdict for plaintiff
of $i616 a:i.
Charles Case. receiver, +. + Case sub
rogated vs.. L. Rose Verdict for plaintiff
OF $4,000
Great Western Insurance Company vs.
S. Vaughan; Orient Insurance Company
VS. same On trial.
Supreme Court.
Present-All the Judges.
1t was announced that cases would he
called on Monday.
The court may render decisions any day
from now to the end of the term. They
have twenty five cases under advisemeut.
The following opinions were read:
Ey CHEF JUSTICE LUDELISG.
No. 5J9J. State vs.. Ned Taylor, appel
lant.-t'rom Fourth Judicial District On
sentence OF two years for horse stealing.
The record shows defendant was present
during the trial. The transcript is badly
made up, and does not show if accused was
asked il he had anything to say why judg-
ment should not be pronounced, and il was
rO'Ihecessary. 4 Black, 375; 9 Hall, P. G. i0l,
407, 4OS: Chit. CIR. l.. ?20 West vs.. State.
: Ala, 2l;!!; Arch. {. p, ,.676. The accused
could not contradict the official acts of the
clerk by parol evidence. Judgment
affirmed.
No. 1858. Ann Dalton, appellant, VS.. sue
cession OF Patrick Halpiu.-From Second
District Court. Suit against an admins
traitor tor alimony for natural children will
Inent affirmed.
No. 5,94. State ex rel. p. Gourgotte VS..
Jean Porto ct ais.-The taking suspensive
appeal gave this court Jurisdiction. Writ
of probi bition made peremptory.
No. 5000. City of New Orleans vs. Bank
Of Lafayette, dppellant.-From Superior
District Court. The bank was organized
since the constitution of 1868, and its prop
hrty is not exempt from taxation. Act No
1872 OF 1851, under which it claims exemp-
ton from municipal taxation is nullity
Judgment affirmed.
No. 5505. City OF New Orleans VS.. S. p.
Russ. apDeliant-From Superior District
COnrt The defendant is liable for the
taxes as assessed on the buildings on the
ot OF ground exempt as belonging to the
POydras Female Orphan Asylum. Judg-
nent affirmed.
No. jii4. Milton Benner Vs. Warner Van
Norden ct al, experimentation Fifth Dis
act Court. The notes had good COZ
'ideration. The motives in exercising a
light do not destroy it. The defendant can
lot refuse his obligation af. .er having the
ormer suit dismissed and receiving the
tock. G. c. 1856; Story Promissory Notes
So. Selling credit W variants its existence.
}. G. 2636, but not the debtors sovency.
;. G.. '!69i. Former decree set aside and
affirmed. Justice Morgan adheres |
Q the former decree.
NO. d313. Louis Duflho vs. Henry Mayer,
appellant Fifth District Court. |
layer was possessor in good faith. c. G. |
45l, SOB. He is entitled to Judgment |
gainst his vendor, Zanaer, and subrogated !
D him against Francois Lacroix; the plain |
1t being decreed the owner of the land.
No. 1894. J. L. Lobdell, tutor, etc., appel |
mt, vs.. w. Ii. Bushnell ct al.-From |
'ourth Distrcs Court. Compensation to |
xperts is to be paid by the party cast.
annuiled.
Br JUSTICE TALIAFEKRo.
Superior District Court-Writ of prohi-
Ition on issuing of writs of possession until
ppeals decided made peremptory.
No. 57:5 Mrs. Elvina HOrtad ct ux vs.. ".
/. Cutter, Otto T. Lornan, intervenOr and
opellant.-From Sixth District Court. To
rotect the rights of the intervenor where
le effect would be to destroy the rights of
party on the property acquired and held
good faith. 20 A., 42i. Judgment an
llled.
No. 57i,: Teutonia Insurance Co mpapv
rom Superior District Court. The unity
action required at a fire requires the
,wer of the fire engineer should be as
,solnte as that of Caesar at Pharsalia or !
apoleon at Austerlitz. But the plaintiffs do |
't desire to use their engines IN conflict |
it'll those of the fire department, and the
solution authorizing arrest and imprison-
ent was an unwarranted stretch Of power, !
alignment affirmed.
No; 56io. State vs. Jerry Gustave ct al
'pellant From Fifth Judicial District,
srdict of manslaughter. When the Judge
Insiders the evidence of sufficient weight
question the innocence of parties sought
be made witnesses for the defense, be ]
ould not order their acquittal Arch; c
p, liS. Judgment affirmed. {
No. i4t4. Francois Gauthler, appellant, VS.. {
Nv Orleans, jackson and Great Northern
Eighth District Court.
images for missending a trunk The
feuse denied that it was sent and
MED negligence. The evidence is un-
isfactoiy, but judgment for defendant
rmed.
Chief Justice LIdeling, Justice Morgan a
th him. dissents. o
10. 517l Adolph Bouchard vs.. Louisa
rnard. administrative. appellant.-From
'ond District Court. Judgment reversed.
10. 5l92 Thomas Mcneil, appellant, Vs.
ter j. Kramer ct al.-From Fourth and
perior District Courts. The constable of 5
, Eighth Justice Court adjudicated two
s of one Murphy to defendants for five
lars, on a tax OF seven dollars and fifty
ts. He offered to redeem for a price
re than the law required, but they de-
nded $500. Plaintiff was an absentee,
the suit against him as a resident is
|. The fieri facias in that suit was the ri
used in the new one against him as an
entee, and the lots were sold under it. IL
re was no legal seizure. r. s., 362S; c. tt
Has. There are many informalities in
Justices proceedings. Judgment re. .,
sed. property decreed to plaintiffs, and 9.
!, declared null. OF
BY JUSTICE HOWELL. :,
o. 1881. Heirs of John Slidell VS.. Ger -
liza National Bank ct al, appellant II
m Fourth District Court We do not M
cur in the position of counsel that State NJ
rts can not inquire into or modify de-
of the United District Court United
es va. f. A. Clark vesting title in the
rantor. The plaintiffs are not attacking
proceedings and judgment in confisca- in
but that the effect ceased at the death =,
leir ancestor. Bigelow vs. Forest, oval. -
Day vs. Union, IS Wal. l62. This is aG
ect. Judgment affirmed. pr
,stice TaliaferrO dissents1 &c
o. ill4. Heirs of John Slidell VS.. Joseph =.
iorner, appellant.-From Seventh Dis "
!. Court. Judgment affirmed. pc
0. 1859. Heirs of John Slidell vs.. Chris th
ler Raiders ct al, appellants.-From
snth District Court. Judgment affirmed.