The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-03-25
THE COURTS.
SUPREME COUNT DECISIONS.
Monday, March "a, 1879.
Present. All the justices.


Croner ct al.-Rehearing granted; 10 q
No. 716l. c. ii. Lawrence % 20; ". W ..
Hermance, for the use, etc, et ai.-iseneaiihk
No 1927, Thomas II. wynne ys. Allen
yume Auditor Rehearing refused;
No. 1887. L. u. Love vs. n: L. "eos'er'
sheriff, ct al Relocating reiused. :, g.
No. 7124 City Of New Orleans vs. 81
Annals Asylum Rehearlng refused.
No. $500. Mrs. Widow J. 9. de st, Romes vs..
the Leyee Steam Cotton Press, ct al Rehear-
No. 1881. Mannheim Berwin vs. the Factors
and Traders Insurance Company Of New
Orleans Rehearing refused
No 5Ggs. Mrs. Julia TRACER, tutrix, W..
Louisiana Equitable Lille Insurance Company.
Rehearng refused.
No 7295. Antoine Ianata vs. Charles Bayhi.
Rehearng refused.
No 1889. The State Of Louisiana vs. Will
Superior Criminal Court, parish OF Orleans.
No iii. Charles h. Alter appellant, vs.. J.
O'Brien, tutor, ct als-4Appeal from the Second
District Court, parish OF Orleans.
Judgment affirmed
No. 1896. The State Of Louisiana vs.. Briney
Woods, alias George Jakes, and VIM. Fulton,
appellants.-Appeal from the Superior Grim
inal Court parish Of Orleans.
Under an Indictment for burglary with
intent TO steal, evidence Of actual stealing is
admissible.
motion In arrest OF judgment on the
ftlhJ tD6 1Qu1CLfQpUb Is u6I6cUINb Will
not be noticed unless the defect complained of
be specially pointed out.
1t Is not necessary that the hour at which
the burglary charged was committed be spe-
Gifted In the charge.
Court does not require all prosecutions there
Instituted 70 be by indictment; some may be
by Information. H8I#
Judgment affirmed.
No 140i Thos. M. CHI, receiver, ct al, va.
A. A. Atocha ct ais, appellant Appeal from
the Sixth District Court, parish Of Orleans.
Rehearlng granted, and on rehearing former
decree adhered to.
No. 1915. State of Louisiana vs.. Peter Davis,
appellant.-Appeal from the First District
Court, parish OF Orleans.
Defendant having been convicted OF assault
by willfully shooting, ETC.. was condemned on
July 10, 1873, TO seven months Imprisonment
in the Parish Prison. On the twenty-fourth
of the same month he was again brought into
court TO receive sentence upon the same ver-
diet, and was condemned to six months con-
flnement in the Penltentiary.
The last sentence is null, and the Judgment
intlctlng IL liz void. The first judgment ID
not appeaable, and therefore, the appeal 10
dismissed. +%Hf
No. 734t. Mrs. Louise A. Gerodias and hus-
band. appellants, vs. Thos H. Handy ct ais
Appeal from the Third District Court, parish
of Orleans.
fails to pray for citation, and none is ordered,
issued or served, these omissions will be at
tributed to the appellant and not to the clerk.
Appeal dismissed
Chew & Lawrence.-Appeal from the Fourth
District Court parish OF Orleans. Judgment
affirmed rsH4 III
No G7s4. Mrs. Z. Eschert appellant, va.
VIM G. Harrison et al.-Appeal from the
Fifth District Court, parish Of Orleans.
No. 1878. Mrs. Elizabeth M. Taylor and h,is-
band W. the sheriff ct a.. appellants. APP
peal from the District Court, parish OF ut.
married woman, though separate In
property Ia not entitled to homestead. under
the act Of 1866. when her husband owns other
property and is not lncapacitated by sickness
from attending to business.
Judgment reversed. .E1
No. cara Mrs Josephine Horrell ct al VS..
Charlotte Cronan ct al, appellants-Appeal
from the Fourth District Court, parish Of Or
leans.
When the Judgment dissolving an injupe-
ton with damages does not, In express terms,
condemn the surety on the Injunction bond
the surety for their recovery, and this suit
can be prescribed against only in ten years
from the date Of tho injunction bond, though
the Judgment the execution. OF which had
been erijoined be itself prescribed
Judgment amended by being reduced to
&ft4S 80.
No 1868 State ex rel. T. A. Bartlette vs..
Board Of Liquidation, appellant. Appeal
from the Fifth District Court, parish OF Or
mapdamus will not lie to compel the
funding Of warrants where the only applica-
tion to have them funded was made TO the
Auditor alone and not to the Board OF Liqui-
dalton.
Judgment reversed and suit dismissed, as
In case OF non suit.
NY JUSTICE MARI.
No 7ts4 Keiffsr Brothers, appellants Va.
M Wohl-hppeal from the Sixth District
Court, parish of Orleans. .-zr
When. subsequently to the seizure OF goods
by attachment, the defendant is adiudged a
bankrupt. rule TO show cause Is the proper
manner for the assignee to obtain disco
tuition of the attachment, on the ground OF its
having been issued within four months Of tie
date OF the adjudication In bankruptcy. Upon
the trial of such a rule, all the proceedings
In bankruptcy need not be offered in evidence
the duly certified copy OF the assignment Is
sufficient. Judgment affirmed.
No 7IS5. y. Hernshcim IL Bro, appellants,
va NJ W1hl-Appeai from the Sixth District
Court. parish Of Orleans.
Judgment affirmed
No. 7342. A. verret, administrator, vs.. r.
Bonvillain. appellant, and r. Bonyilain. ap,
from the Second District Court, parish Of Or
surety upon an Injunction bond Is COM
petent to sign as surety the bond furnished
by defendant for an appeal from the Judgment
perpetuating the injunction.
Motion to dismiss OverTuled
No. 7s4s Robert Bonviliain, appellant vs..
Adolph Verret.- Appeal from the Second Dis
trict Court, parish OF Orleans
Appeal dismissed.
No. 7349. John Ii. Scheen, administrator,
appellant w. w. O. HALEY, administrator
appellant Williams Il Dickson intervenors.-
Appeal from the District Court parish OF Red
River.
On an appeal taken by plaintiff from q final
Judgment rendered against him, this court
cannot review an interlocutory judgment
IN tb.aa ot,,. emit nGt6 nFnnHant
appellee, unless the latter In answer to the
appeal nray for the reversal of such interlocu-
tory Judgment
Judgment Of lower court reversed as to
plaintiff
BY JUSTICE DE BLANC.
g No. 717S. State OF Louisiana vs.. William
Henry Scott, appellant.-Appeal from the
District Court, parish OF Iberville.
Judgment affirmed.
No $685. John J. Lewis appellant, vs. A.