New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-01-11
COURT RECORD.
MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1876.
United States Supreme Court.

United States Supreme Court.
The following was submitted January 4:
The following cases we're disposed OF:
Chaffraix Va. Shitf-From the Circuit
Court of Louisiana. The decree of the
Circuit Court reversed, with instructions TO
dismiss the bill.
Kennard vs. the State of LOuisiana.-This
was Q contest for the position of justice of
the Supreme Court OF the State between
Kernard and Morgan. This court atfirms
the Judgment OF the State court as against
Kennard, holding that the proceedings
were regular, sufficient and conclusive OF
the questions involved.
Henry w. Nebbett VS.. James +. McFar-
land.-From the District Court Of Louisi-
ana. Decree affirmed, with costs.
supreme Court.
Present - Justices Taliaferro, Howell,
WHY and Morgan.
Absent-Chief Justice Ludeling.
The following opinions were read:
BY JUSTICE rALIAFERRO.
No. 1886. State We. E. B. Malone, alias
Kinch Malone, and Patrick Jones, appel
lants-From Superior Criminal Court.
Breaking and entering, etc: Sentence OF
seven years. April 30, 1874, appellants
were tried on an information charging the
crime was committed April -. the State
failed to prove the day and the jury, on in
structions, returned verdict OF not guilty.
Another information charged the crime as
of April IL and II. june "a, the accused
declined to answer and pleaded autret0is
acouit, which was Overruled June a. In
October they were convicted. The plea
can not avail them. They were not in
jeopardy on the first information because
they we're tried on different charge. Judg-
ment affirmed.
No. 59O5. Urban Theurer vs. McGibbon,
ALVIN & Dubois, specialization Sixth
District Court. The plaintiffs are Judgment
creditors of Miss Emma Lasparre, and were
epioined from selling her property by plain
tiff, her vendee, she retaining possession.
The sale was an actual contract, with right
of redemption, and not simulated sale;
cages paid off. A judgment creditor can not
disregard an actual sale, but must proceed
by revocatory action. Judgment affirmed.
No. 6OO3. Heirs of A. w. Merriam VS.. Da-
vid Jones, appellant-From Sixth District
Court. The bond is sufficient for devolu-
tive appeal. Motion to dismiss overruled.
No. $500. Mrs. Widow L. Cormier. appel
LIANT. va. Mrs. Soye.-From Sixth District
Court. The prominent question in this case
being ono of fraud, the determination is the
province of the jury, which was improperly
refused. Judgment reversed ana case re-
manded.
No. 1898. State va. Lawrence Williams,
appellant-From Superior Criminal Court.
Burglary. George H. Braughn, Esq, was
not Judge Of tue court at the time Of the
trial. See State vs.. Phillips. Case re-
manded.
BY JUSTICE HOWELL.
No. COLL. Southern Bank, appellant, VS..
Louisiana National Bank.-From Superior
District Court. The Southern Bank Is
holder of q large number of interest cou-
mons. detached from certain bonds OF the
city Of New Orleans; alleged that the funds
resulting from the collection OF taxes, spe,
cialIy imposed to pay sad interest," N na1
been deposited in the Louisiana National
Bank, to the credit of the holders or bearers
of such coupons, and caused writ OF &C.
ouestration to issue against the said funde,
claiming to be the owner thereof, ana aver
ing an apprehension that the defendant
bank would part with or dispose OF the
same during the tendency OF this SUIT,
which is instituted by the southern oank
against the Louisiana Natlona! BANK, tno
directors thereof, and the city of New Or
leans, to be declared the owner of the
funds seuuestered, and to condemn the said
parties to pay the amount of the coupons.
The defendant bank and the city OF New
Orleans moved to set aside the writ OF &C.
ouestration, on the grounds that the petit
ton sets forth no cause OF aes,on IL tof NJ ING
of 1870. courts are prohibited from issuing
writ Of sequestration, the object OF which is
to enforce the paymens Of money %.e cis' tSat
the money which it is sought to sequester is
8 debt due from the Louisiana NaIi0nal
Bank, as a depoeit.ry, to the city Of Nov
Orleans % depositor; that the same Is not
the property Of plaintiff, and plaietln y not
entitled to the possession thereof, ana that
the said indebtedness can not be cequest-
ered. even If Q writ of Representation can
dsvit i not true, and the Bond Il Insult.
Gent; that the writ Of sequeetEntion can
leeeliy issue Only 70 enfseoe . right OF own
sIship er pesssaase e e prixil9ge g e PEP r