New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-05-21
COURT R1CORD.
SATURDAY, NAY 20, 1876.

1
Conspiracy to defrsud. Prosecution moi
| yet finished.
| Supreme Court.
Present-An the judges.
| The following opinions were rendered:
By CHIEF JUSTICE LuDELING.
| No. Sis. Stoddart Howell We. city IF New
Orleans, appellant.-From Superior District
Court. Injunction on execution for want
| of citation. No evidence was produced fol
! it. Judgment reversed and Injunction dis
solved. with twenty per cent ON the amount
No $50. Rufus NAPLES, appellant, vs..
| city of New Orlcans.-Fr0m Superior Dis.
trict Court For balance of rent and dam
| age for injuries for building leased for
| schoolhouse, abandoned by the lessee dur
| ing the absence of plaintiff. The lessee
s shocld have gwen the notice under c. C.,
1886 In default of that the lease continued
Damages $500; rent $40 per month. Judg-
| men reversed.
No 629l. Succession of Owen j. DOnnel
| la; absent heirs, appellants.-From Second
District Court. Three witnesses support
| the pretensions of plaintiff. None saw the
will signed by testator. c. c., 1866; Is A.,
S. The PLAINTIFF have utterly failed to
adduce legal evidence to prove an olo
| graphic will. Judgment reversed and suit
| dismissed.
01 JU0I1CG IALlAEE hhOs
No. 6243. Succession of John K. Elgee;
opponents, sppellants.--From Second Dis
| trict Court. Judgment Diminishing oppo-
affirmed. Justice Howell concurs in the
decree.
BY JUSTICE HOWELL.
No. 1907. Succession of o. and Ann Nc.
Call; administrator, appellant.-Fr0m Sec
Ond District Court. Judgment reversed,
and purchasers ut sale, May 80, 1874, Or
dered to comply with their bids and accept
the property, or it be sold at their risk.
Justice WHY, Justice Morgan with him,
dissents.
No. 162lS School directors vs. R. K. An
derson, appellsnt.-FrOm Thirteenth Judi
cial District For dissolution of q sale to
Defendants ancestor on the ground Of non.
payment of price. Defense-l. Default.
G. C., 1912. The article does not apply to
the case. 9 A. 355. 9. Prescription. Be.
cause the notes are prescribed it does not
follow that the action lie prescribed. "a A.
5H. 3. On revenues and improvements .
restitution must be made. Judgment
amended and affirmed.
Justice WHY dissents.
BIZ JUSTICE Willy.
No. 1896. New Orleans Savings Institu-
ton, appellant, We. p. w. Leslie.-From Su-
perior District Court. The city Of New Or.
leans has NO privilege superior to special
1871, for the taxes of 1868 and 1869, which
were not recorded till 1873. Const. l23; act
No. AZ of 1871, sections 66. e., IS, 1869: %
A. 278; % A. go, 694, Cos; "a A. Is; Is A.
232; &c A. 80, $50, ISL. Judgment reversed
and recorder ordered to erase the priv
leges of the city recorded for 1868 and 1869.
No. 762. State W. Richard Taylor
From Superior District Court. On rehear
ing, former decree left undisturbed.
great length. dissents.
Justice Taliaferro concurs with the Chief
Justice.
No. 1866. Mrs. E. j. Lavergne, appellant,
va. city of New Orleans.-From Superior
District Court. The advertisement of tax
bills is sufficient notice. Plaintiff has never
disposed of her property. assessed in her
name. Judgment affirmed.
BY JUSTICE MORGAN.
No. 5548. New Orleans Sanitary and
Fertilizing Company, appellant, W. Board of
Health.-FIom Superior District Court.
Msndamus to compel enforcement of act
No. 102 of 1874, section two. 1t is repealed
by act No. As of 1874. Judgment affirmed.
Justice WHY dissents.
No. $3.50. Jean Dutrey vs.. B. Laguens,
appellant.-From Fifth District Court. De-
fendant's wife dying after judgment against
him he seized the property ae tutor Of mi
nor children. The Fifth District Court had
jurisdiction; it was not strictly succession
matter. The proceeding by rule was prCper.
Judgment affirmed except as to minors
mortgage, which is annulled.
superior District Court.
DECISION BY JUDGE LYNCH.
l.. C. Roudanez ct al. vs. Mayor and
Administrators OF New Orleans.
In granGing q suspensive appeal in this
case, in compliance with Q peremptory man
damus issued by the honorable the Supreme
Court, deem 1t my duty under doctrine
| and action of that court In the case of the
State vs. the Judge of the First District,
| 10 L., 167, and also in the recent case Of the
State ex rel. Temple S. CoOns We. the judge
| of the Superior District Court, to require
| under the circumstances of this case the
| appellants to file with the clerk of this
court their additional bond in favor of the
| intervenor with good and sufficient security
| in solido, conditioned that said appellants
shall pay all such damageslas the intervenor
the said New Orleans Pacific Railroad Com
pany, may sustain in case it should be de-
cided that the injunction heretofore OBJ
tanned has been wrongfully sued out and
illegally and unlawfully kept in force or
the appeal herein taken.
1t is therefore ordered that said inter
venor, the New Orleans Pacific Railroad
Company, appear before this court on Sat
urday, the twenty-seventh instant, at IL
A. M, and present their proof as to the
probable injury the said company may
and its being kept in force by virtue o
said suspensive appeal. 1t is further or
dered that the plaintiff and appellants b.
notified to be present at the taking of the
said testimony, and to present to the cour
such evidence as they may have to offer il
the premises.
State ex rel. the Attorney General TO
Thomas Carey, tax collector of Third Dis
trict, va. John Barrow, claiming the Otic
under later cOmmissi0n.-Jury discharged
having returned a sealed verdict.
Citizens Bank vs.. Recorder of Mort
cages. Application that defendant eras
the claims tor taxes on its property to
1924, on the ground that it is exempt b.
its charter.
| Superior Criminal Court.
State vs.. James L. Observation-Disclosures
The following is the charge Of Judge Steele
GENrLEMEN-This very important cas-
will soon be submitted for your action
You have heard the evidence and argu
ments of counsel. and it is now my duty
presiding Judge of this court to charge yO
as to the law applicable to the case. Un
der our law the court is not permitted t
say what has or has not been proven, or t
even refer to the evidence. l shall be YER
brief in my charge. confning myself strictl
to the law, and it will not be my purpose t.
indicate my views as to the facts, nor shal
say anything to you for the purpose O
stimulating or urging you to do your duty
1t is for me to see that the trial is propert
conducted, and that ysu are not deceived a
TO the law; further than this you alone ar