The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-06-15

the holder of certain of its bonds. This il
another of many others of . similar char
acter.
Superior District Court.
The New Orleans, Mobile and Texas Rail.
road Company has brought two suits in thii
court to appropriate property, batture and
streets on the levee. The suits are brought
against the city only. =
As the object Of the plaintiff u TO block the
following streets from access to the river. to-
wit: Gravier, Notre Dame, st. Joseph, North
and South Market streets, the owners o.
property in those streets are deeply interested
in the result.
The value of their property, in q great
measure, depends upon those streets being
left open to the river.
MANY of these property holders have en-
gagged the services Of w. w. King to look
after their interests.
Second District Court.
Judge Tissot, Monday morning, refused
petition for the Introduction of Dr.. 0. Anfoux.
Sixth District Court. @
IMPORTANT DECISION BY JUDGE sAUCIER. b
DAMAGE FOR WRONGFUL ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF
ATTACHMENT.
Julius Leu u.s. Wallace q Co., ct dl-Plain-
tiff claims from the defendants, in solido, the
sum of 5000, for damage done to his reputa.
ton, business and property by the wrongful
issuance of a writ of attachment, under which
his entire stock in trade was seized and re-
moved by the Sheriff Ek A5 al
On the 9th August. 1873, the defendants,
Wallace l. Co., brought suit against the
plaintiff, claiming from him the amount of a
NOE made by him to their order for S16O;
and, alleging under oath, that plaintiff had
naortgaged, assigned or disposed Of, or was
about mortgaging, etc, his property, with
intent to defraud his creditors, or give an I'M.
fair prefesence to some Of them. and making
oath further that he had converted, or Wal
about to convert his property into money, OF
evidences of debt, with intent to place it be.
yond the reach of his creditors. they sued
out the writ of attachment complained Of
On . rule taken by plaintiff the writ wa
set aside. defendants falling entirely to sup
port their affidavit. $3.50
The writ of attachment was Wrongfuily
sued out. Plaintiff had dealt with defendants
for about year, and to the amount Of about
twelve hundred dollars He carried on q
ANAL business, and bad established GORE
amending line Of credit He WAS good and
solvent. Beyond small Indebtedness to one
of the city banks, resulting from overdrawing
his account, which was settled amicably. and
the claim of defendants for 500, hs had no
outstanding liability. His stock in trade was
worth over two thousand dollars, and he
owned real estate worth about four thousand
dollars 5Is
The statute Of 1868. providing for two ad.
ditional cases in which creditor may obtain
the attachment Of the property OF his debtor,
does not purport to relax the rightly of our
attachment laws in favor Of the creditor. On
the contrary, the third and last section Of the
statute provides, for the protection OF the
debtor. that the creditor shall make oath Of
the facts upon which he claims the issuance
of the writ Of attachment in said cases. This
requirement vas not observed by defendants,
and it is verv probable that they would not
have resorted to the extraordinary and harsh
remedy Of an attachment proceeding had they
INQUIRED into the facts Of their case.
The plaintiff was, Ut the time the writ issued.
confined to the house of friend, laboring
under mental alteration. He had been ab-
sent from his place Of business, located in q
central portion of the city where he was very
generally known, for about month, by
reason Of his sfiliction; but on inquiry de-
PENDANTS could easily have ascertained all facta
necessary to guide them In the collection Of
their claim. .s .s.5,ss1 ,1+..u,s ss,, .as.
Il is cortended on behalf of defendants tina,
.plaintif, in order to recover In this suit, must
not only show want of probable cause, but
malice on their part. This is good law. Ma
lice. howeves, in ito Legal sense. Is never IN
derstood to denote ennaity toward particu.
lar In iividuai, but it signifies rather the in
tent from which flows any unlawful and irju-
rious act, committed without legal just6ca-
ZION. sa9 So AEAT kE- Z
The writ q attachment vas sued out BY
defendants without PROBABLE cause, and the
seizure under il IVES excessive This was an
abuse Of the process of the cour. both, in
the matter OF Its issuance aud the manner Of
it, execution, which the court must notice,
and for which defendants must answer to the
plaintiff. - cast. ~ :
Plaintiff is entitled to fees of counsel en-
ployed by him to set aside said writ OF attach
ment, and to prosecute the present suit. The
services we're rendered before this court, and
are valued ct one hundred and Afty dollars
Under the evidence, plaintiffs demand is
established for five hundred dollars additional,
making an aggregate of six hundred and fifty
dollars, for which there must be Judgment
in favor of the plaintiff and against the de-
PENDANTS. the commercial firm of Wallace 4
Cd. and the individual members thereof, in
solido, with legal interest from judicial de-
msnd and costs.
Plaintiffs suit - against w. P. Cottle,
surety on the attachment bond. is dismissed.
A young lady was yesterday standing on
the wharf ct the foot Of Second street, waving
her handkerchief at q schooner lying In the
stream know anybody aboard ?" queried
her companion as he came along NO,
don't but thy are waving their handler
chiefs at me-" she said. Hand Cha y ker
(hoo) chiefsr he exclaimed, dropping his
basket and leaning against q woodpiie;
"why, them's the mems shirts hung up 10
dry" She waved into warehouse. Detroit
Free Press.
Never make q wooden leg Of oak-oak al