The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-11-21
THE: COURTS.
aunrefne Court Decisions.

MILES.
IN hanaing n J-The objections ln or I'm
lunl prosecution that tho eYidntc9 u tho seleo-
tinn and appointment II tho Jury commission
ars who dew Tho jury for that torn md Of tho
swearing nf tho commissioners bnfpra drawing
THO jury 1oes not appear q ,nanfh &c 9pon ~,
good grounds f9r motion ~ arrest 81 jH1R-
mant,
MI. 1871 HENRtHrrH HrHRt, Wire, rret VS., FRAw-
fofE FRAadrNGrEs III AL.
Hu Nanui,,y Il 4 Whom counsel for both
parties arc unable 10 agree upnn y statement Ut
Inets In eRllse wherein no part OF the aral fas-
ilmBny haa bsen tEkan III writing nnd the Judge
Il gun cannot snupfY such statement, ~ motion
10 dinmies tho nppsnl will be- sustained.
MO T5a4-rHB STATE tx REL L. Il, L u F. HERsrp
vs. TINE JUDGE OF THE THIRD DISTRICT COURT.
ORLEANS.
~ Nuu.iuy & 4 In proceedings to obtain
Il forced respite the hppptntment pf Prov
ayonal ayndn pending condensation as ~
whethar Or no the respite wna granted NJ th"
,lenting Ut rredltora is nnwarranfea. md ans
pensIva appeal viii be IRON M order making
such appointment,
III IL only When tho refusal ~ grant tho respite
hes been finally deter tnnod TINT tho oes,siion OF
the dahtnr's property aHRuas mud n synaln ehn
he appointed,
No 75lR sfArr or LOUISIANA " FRANCOIS pr-
F9Uh.
Hv Mm7., J. The act Of 1877 amending article
tHa IT tho Code III FrnnfnH go Ms 10 dispansn with
formal bills nf exception when tho points 70
served are tnken down by tho reporter or nlefk.
l. @t sEHahs to 4sVa~ e II a
District Judge only when the objections and
rulings arc set forth In u formal bill Of exeep-
lion
Proof that tho aoersed attempted 10 escape
from prison n Tow days before the ttial Of Tint
he actually escaped md fled from Justice after
tho nrTes for tho crime charged. In admissible.
Sections 1910 End 2pbs OF he Raptsad atntntes
which make tho voluntary declaration Of the
accused received BY the committing magistrate
evltienoe before. tho grand aud petit iurles. do
not make It evidence In his InVor, or authorize
him 10 INTRODUCES II on tho trial
NO. tG2s-cHAs RtrIHsKr vs.. Nv JACOBS. COHEN.
EapEL PHELPS, IsTHByENoRs
~ Ma,r, when tho Transcript contains
neither bill of EXCEPTIONS nor statement Of
facts. nor assignment Of errors. nor testimony
touching tho demand OF intervenors, the legal
dered In their favor against pafuliT after
hearing pIandIngs, eviaNnne mud counsel" was
rendered. upon sun 2leut proof, and 1t will bs
af1lrmad
NO. Ttea Mrs. RosANNA O'KEFrE vs.. n n. HANDY.
SHERIFF. ET Al.
~ NeH1anc. J When married. woman who
has mortgnged her separate property In nc
oorinnee with the provisions of arts, 12s l27 md
In ~ the Civil Code socks to avoid the oblga-
tion on neeount Of fraud. tho burden of proof In
upon her to establish that fraud.
In Rneh Il case tho contract will not be avoided
harn'laN entered Into under the influences NJ tho
tbrenta and rarronches Of tho husband. when It
ls not shown that the mortgagaa was party to
or eogntzant Of tho pretended threats and 70.
prnnehes..
When utter tho doGh ri her husband woman
who during her marriage hos nortgaged her
Separate property without complying with tho
formaities prescribed by the CODE pays Inter
eat upon tho lonn secured by thn mortgage such
payment amouns to Il ratification ~ and curos
the defect IN the contract
NO. h912 MARY 1T. MILLER. WIFE. HTJ ys, HER
HUSBAND.
m peH}auf. lin contest with tho hue
bands creditors the wife, who claims Ms be.
longing to her property purchased during this
markings. must produces legal proof that the
purchase Was really made with her separate
pHraphsrnnl funds.
No. 75l2 STATE or LOUISIANA VS.. II. DOLE, ALIAS
ED. ITALIA
Tyv SPENCER THE fact That several msmbers
accused party we're not selected or drawn nc
eorllng to law. Ia not good ground for n motion
In arrest Of judgment,
Snnh mn objection should be urged MS n chnl-
lange tn the array ri tue grand Jury before ar
rau2ment md plea,
NO. 1860 sTATE, TE REL. A, .. PADnoH vs. T..
MORALES, PARIsH JUDGE or ST. BERNARD.
Nv SPENCER. Tho Bupreme Court cannot
by mnudaruus compel the Juags Of mn Inferior
court to grant m injunction. The notion ri the
Judge in regard to the writ can be reviewed only
on RnpHal.
NO. 7tsp-HHNRY RArTH vs.. MRS. L. BONE.
sCffNEtDEts. TIT nD OPPONENT.
Hv White. LIN order that ths privilege re-
quitting from q building contract may enjoy q
preference over Il previously recorded mort
gnga. tha description uf the property In the
contract must III oil this legal requirements
prescribed by article $500 Of tho Civil Code fol
tho validity OF u mortgage.