The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-12-12
aunreme Court Decisions.


nopasoN Er Ala.
~ 1ffnning. e I Though an anoiono"
bn inaitloroni M Ia Who ahal obtain TN
amount ~ tho pnah fapnalt made IN hil
| hands hy tho adjndicatec OF propert Y sold h,
| him ynt ha Inns nh nuponlabln lntpraet In
| Judgment rendered against hlmeelf In favor q
such adiudeatre and In hia own favor ngnlnR
| tho vend0r III tho property, whom he hRt
called In warranty In n suit instituted a4Hina
him hy tho adjudpatne Tor tho recovery o
| such drppsit
MO- 1890 THE sTATF. TX HHIt, +. n. rANrot
VS.. nnAHp UF sssrsRoHa
Ru lfGunng. e Z Under tho assreansu
not If lgi7. aaarasmouta Of rcal estate mad,
IN TINT year. and moi complained nf then. can
not ho changed thereafter Tor four yeare eS
eopt IL make proper subtraction for deatrue
tion 81 proper addition FOR improvements
lnade aFte, the assessment.
Hence. though property thus aaEnGncl he
sold under execution Issued during tho FOL
lowing year. for less thnn tho amount ful
which II hal boom assessed. tho ndjuairatnf
cannot cause rnasReasmont upon The bnsis
Of tho price of adjudication
Tho act Of IVA nnrndsLory ~ the ngsnga
mont act OF tsi7 did not Cuninmplnta n nnw
assessment of property assessed under tbs
latter mel. but provided soloIy for the placing
upon the rolls Of at property hitherto omit
tod thnrafrom
MO. 1912 vHIRET vs.. noNytbhaIN. AND nON.
VILLAIN W., vEItREr.
iiv ifd1r, u The Judgment making ahso.
lutte. IN DEFENDANTS absence. a rue Ia show
cause why dispositions taken under commits
sion should not be received I'm evidence must
bo viewed M an absolute nuslity where the
record does moi show notice of trial served on
defen'ant or proof Of consent In lieu Of no
tiCe.
II tho distriet judge docs not ignore such
Judgment, and pass upon theohjectitea which
defendant IN rule seeks to urge against The
admission OF the dsposlttona. upon the trial
upon the merits, tho ease must he ramantIetl
as this court cannot pass upon such ohjee-
tions. brought up In u blu Of exceptions In
tho ahsence Of n ruling upon them by the
Judge q quo.
NO 7505. II. LEMANN Va. WIDOW r. A. TUX
IbLO.
HU dfu1r. 4 In proceedings Ivy aeu,os.ra-
Il II before n court other than that of defend
ants domicile, tho court acquires Jurisdiction
only to tho extont OF tho amount claimed and
sworn to In the petition. and with reapoct only
to tho property seized under this writ
Supplemental petitions. filed by plaintiff In
scqtcstration. which sot up new and ncdi-
tional demnnda. must be sworn to. now writs
grated thereon. and now seizures made
ther'under. II this be not dome they should
be- dismissed for want Of jurisdiction
Defendant being sued Ms widow In commu-
nifty and administrative Of her husbands sue
cesson. answered. by denying any interest In
tho matter. ~ sho had rsnounOed the com
munty and now administrator had boon ap-
pointed IN her stnad, Thoreupon. on motion
oi plaintiff, which suggeated that defendant
by her disclaimer of interest had put horsnlf
out of court n Judgment was ren,Iered to the
extent Of Tho property seuuestered and with
privilege on tho same. Such Judgment IN n
nullty, II proceeding hy representation noe !,e-
ing purely ono IN rem.
Fho rnlo which prevents intcryentlons In
attachment proceedings aftor the property
81 a hnGI kIAf alamo. a..
apply Misrepresentation suits.
The order granting II writ OF sc,IIloat ration
must Fix tho amount Of iha bond to ho fur
niahed by plaintiff. and If tho amount bo not
SO liked, and tho omission be mot aupplied
by the Judge before tho writ Issues any sol
euro mado hereunder will beinvnid This
inyaliatty cannot be- cured by suhseulent
valid order, except new writ Issue and n
new seizure he mnde under the latter order
NO. 1865 aFWEssIoN or I. v. MAoAKTy.
81 DeRidns. j. Tho commissions Of mn
auetioneer employed To Rol property In
which n minor IL Interested must ba caIprl-
lated Mt tho rate established by section iGn
II. ~, viz At | per cent on all sums under
S25aN. Mt half of per cent on all sums nbove
that amount, upon tho total amount Of tho
sal", and not only upon the minors proper
tion thereof
NO. }9l9 sTArE on b0U a;IANh vs.. bANpY
MARTIN.
~ ffFhEnf, III htief m Indictment for
carrying concealed weapons tho accused will
not be- allowed To prove that he owned no
pistol. had never carried one before and Tint
tho ono found concealed upon HIS person hnd
been ntrusted to him by ts owner for tho
sole purpose of procuring cartridges that
would tit IT,
NO 1888 BKEpow 4 FRYE vi. ar. ANrA's;
CHAPEL III AIS.
Rp Spencer. l. When two cases Involving
the distribution OF II certain fund have been
and tried together tho mere Ynet
that separate Judgements we're rendered In
each ease, one of which was for an unappeal-
able amount, Will not prevent tho taking af ~
appeal by the party cast In tho smaller lldu
nent
No. 1888 TIE STATE VS.. JoHN FOSTER AND
GlIAs. SPEED.
BV Spencer. j. In tho absence Of charges
pf fraud or corruption on the part of jury
"A court should not maintain Il
to tho array OF jurors made ON
the ground that an undue proportion OF tho
namess drawn from the Jury wheel where
1hoee of persons disqualified from or not
liable TO jury duty,
An indictment, under section 49, Il s., for
forged document neeM not
,harge ali intent to "iuJure and derraud" H. |
IS sufficient Ii the intent either to injilrn or I
hattie defraud be- charged. Doing the act
prohibited with either OF both iutents is II /
rhine, and the intentH may be charged sep
lratafy or eonJunCtiyely.
20. 1910 MCEosKEY, HIeIFY 4 co. VIZ. WING
FIELD Y BRIDGES.
tn Spencer Il The fact that interroga-
urhs prop0unded to a NONRESIDENT party To /
suit were sworn to by him before a commits i
Toner OF this State, bat not under commits
ion issued from the court, Is not ground
or taking the intefrogatorie5 for confessed
The surety upon an attachment cannot dis
'ute the validity OF the judgment against his
principal, II The judgment bo final rs against
he latter.
When defendant dies after answer filed.
he suit does not abate. nor Ii the court where
. 1t 10 pending deprived Of Jurisdiction, and