New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-02-02

to claim interest on the obligations held BY
them and to submit their claim for judicial
determination. They claim five per cent on
amount from January l, 1869, to July, 2,
1870, when they were funded; also five per
cent per annum on $5624 81 amount of con-
troller' 9 warrants drawn upon the city trea-
surer, the same reservation being made OF
the right to claim interest. The case was
twice tried in the court below, and each
time judgment was in favor of plaintiff.
DEPENDENT appealed. We lind NO law au-
thorizing plaintiff to CLAIM interest. The
city funding act is silent. The Mayors
authorized to exchange securities that bear
no interest for bonde Of like amount that do.
This they have done, aud they are pre-
cluded from further demand. Judgment
reversed and judgment given for defend
ant. plaintiffs paying costs in both courts.
No. 5ol5. State ex rel. Thomas Lynne vs..
John Calhoun, Administrator Of Accounts,
ct al.-From Superior District Court. Re-
lator AYERS that in pursuance Of law he
registered in the Department of Public
Accounts of the city of New Orleans. q
Judgment obtained against the city of $9742.
The same, after eight months, and repeated
application for warrants, remains unpaid.
There has been, repeatedly, he AYERS. in the
city treasury, and now is in it, sufficient
sum to pay the judgment, specially desig-
mated and act apart in the annual budget
Relator applied a qua for writ of man
damus, commanding Administrator Calhoun
to warrant on the Administrators of Finance
for the payment of the Judgment, and
prayed for an injunction against the Admin
lstrator of Accounts, restraining him from
warranting on the general funds for any
purpose other than payment of the judg-
ment until it be paid. A rule nisi
was granted. Defendant responded, that
by act No. 5, of 1870, the court was
without authority to hear, order, or
allow any writ of mandamus, directly
or indirectly, tending to compel the
issue Of warrant tor the payment of
any claim or judgment against tho city of
New Orleans; and that there was and has
not been sufficient sum in the treasury to
paw said Judgment. Rule was made absO-
lutte, peremptory mandamus issued, and
respondent appealed. Plaintiff has failed to
prove that there was, at the time OF his de-
mand, money in the treasury specially get
apart for tho payment of judgments. lie
ing by mandamus, even it he could other.
wise have legally resorted to it, Judgment
of the lower court was erroneous, ana the
rule is discharged at PLAINTIFF cost.
No. 554l. State ex rel. Mrs. Pecot VS.. the
parish judge Of st. Mary.-Relators were
refused q suspensive appeal in a certain
case pending in the parish court by the
parish judge of St. Mary. A rule nisi was
granted, and respondent answered that ap.
peal was refused because REALTORS we're not
parties to the suit; that their intervention
not having been filed by leave Of the court
or served or put at issue, did not authorize
q judgment for or against them, from which
they could appeal; they had no right to ap
peal from q judgment against the defend
ant, their intervention not having been
passed on. 1t appears that REALTORS were
not parties to the suit, because the judge
enormously refused to allow them to inter
vene. But third parties may intervene
when they have been aggrieved by the judg-
ment. G. p, art. ST.. Realtors aver they
have been aggrieved. 1t is ordered that the
rule be made absolute, the parish judge
grant REALTORS suspensive appeal, as prayed
for, on furnishing bond, and that respond
ent pay costs of these proceedings.
No. 1868. John TObin vs. Canal and
Seventh District Court. This is similar to
the case of Scully vs.. same defendants.
Judgment annulled and reversed; judgment
ordered for defendant, plaintiff paying costs
in both courts.
No. 1894. City of New Orleans Us. l. w.
Patton, sheriff.-Fsom Superior District
Court. The city brought suit against de-
PENDANT, a former sheriff of Orleans, to
recover $3.50, alleged to be an amount Of
costs and fees above the fees allowed by
law to be collected from the city in Grim
inal cases. Plaintiff appealed from judg-
ment for defendant. Defendants bills were
approved and presented month by month,
and he claims that the city can not go
behind these bills and contest any of the
items contained. Judgment affirmed.
No. $3.50. Martin Kenapsky vs. Mark
Davis ct al.-From Eighth District Court.
Plaintiff brought suit because defendants
built privy in a yard owned in common,
which became an intOlerable nuisance, and
the structure broke into the walls and in
jured property; the vault was constructed
contrary to law; be claimed damages OF
$4,000, and an Injunction to prohibit the use
of the privy. A prescription of ten years
was interposed. Judgment was rendered
May IS, 1870, for defendants A new trial
was granted, and it was made in the Eighth
District Court, then created, which awarded
the plaintiff damages. Judgment in rela-
ton to damages is reversed, but otherwise
affirmed; defendants paying costs in lower
court, and plaintiff Of this appeal.
BY JUSTICE MORGAN.
No 1887. City of New Orleans praying
for the appropriation of property for widen
ing Poland street.-From the Superior Dis
trict Court. In 1866 Irwin purchased tract
CT land, measuring $50 feet front on the
river, running back 64O0 feet. The depth
fronted on Poland street. The price was
$4,000. The City Railroad Company owns
square of ground opposite. Irwin and
the company petitioned the Council to take
sixty feet from Twins property to widen
Poland street, and it was done. Irwin
claims the value Of the property expro-
priated; jury gave him $4,000. He ap-
pealed. The city has not complained of the
Judgment. Irwin has no cause to complain.
Judgment affirmed.
No 1923. Blaney G. Walsh vs.. Canal and
Claiborne Street Railroad Company
Seventh District Court. This case does
not differ from the one of Sculiy vs.. the
same defendant, recently decided. The
Judgment is avoided, annulled and reversed,
and Judgment ordered for defendant for
costs in both courts.
No. 1913. F. Peppo ct al. VS.. Perkins &,
Hearsey.-From Fifth District Court. Suit
for the value Of schooner. Judgment for
plaintiff affirmed.
No. 1892. The pontchartrain Railroad
Company vs.. the City of New Orleans
From Seventh District Court. Plaintiff
purchased from b. Marigny strip of land
fifty feet wide, February %, 1880, title is
unquestioned, aud land bounded on either
side by public street. March 25, 1880,
the City Council authorized for the period
of their charter, their road to run in the
street, road or avenue, and To use without
inconvenience to the public; plaintiffs
erected depot covering their own land. In
July, 1870, the council revoked this per
mission, and directed them to remove these
DISTRIBUTIONS. They applied for an injunc-
ton; rule was taken to set aside the ill.,
junction under article 307 Code of Practice,