The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1882-12-16


W. Blake of Lafourche and Henry D.
Smith of St. Mary arrived here by Mon
days afternoon train FROM New Orleans
and at $3.50 P M, the Circuit Court was
opened.
The commission and oath of Judge
Smith, issued and taken after the conf;r
nation by the Senate of his appoint
ment, were ordered spread on the min
utcs.
The only ease on the docket, that of
the opposition of widow Apoline Monson
to homologation of administrators &C
count in the succession of Donat Mon
son, was called up, argued by Mr.. Pugh
in behalf Of the appealing heirs, and
submitted for Judgment. Court then ad-
journsd until Tuesday, when tho case
was ~re.penod for further argument,
Judge Jno. H. 1lsley, attorney for Mrs.
Monsoon, having been absent tho day be-
fore. After argument by Mr.. Puyh for
the heirs, Judge Ilsley for widow Mon
son aud Mr.. Leche for the administra-
tor, the case was again submitted and
the following judgment rendered:
The sole question in this case is one of con-
tribution between cosmetics. It appears that
the opponent in this case, together with Donat
Monsoon. now deceased, obligated themselves
seyerally and in solido on q tutorship bond;
that judgment as against the surety, widow
ApOllne MOnson was recovered in an action
on that bond. Apprehensive of a seizure under
that judgment she now opposes the administra-
tors account rendered in the succession of her
co-surety, Donat Monson, and asks that said
account be 30 amended as to compel q contri-
button from said succession for half of the
Judgment obtained against her and to be paid
over to her. The Judgment of the District
Court is to the effect that said contribution and
payment be made1in conformity to the prayer
Of the opponents petition. The objection
urged by the administrators is that the oppo-
nent has not satisfied the judgment rendered
against her and that the theory of contribution
is based upon the. basis of payment which is
wanting in this instance. C. c., article SO5S
(3O27), the law governing this CASE reads az
follows:
Where several persons have been surety for
the same debtor, or for the same debt, the
surety who has satisfied the debt has his remedy
against the other suretles IN proportion to the
share of each; but this remedy takes place only
when such person has paid in consequence of q
lawsuit instituted against him.
Until this law is shown to have been CON-
nlied With the Rpnellee ia withOut canaa .of
action. In order to entitle debtor to a right
of contribution against his co-debtor or surety
he must have satisfied the original debt in con-
sequence of lawsuit instituted against him,
wha1e there arises subrogation in his favor
against his co-surety for his share Of the debt.
The law on this point seems unambiguous and
appears to be 80 elementary and so we'll recog-
nized that the courts have never been called
upon to sdjudicate on the same. We consider
for these reasons that the opposition fled is
not well founded in law and should have been
dismissed. It is therefore ordered that the
judgment Of the lower court maintaining the
opposition Of widow Apoline Monson be an
nulled and reversed and that there be judgment
dismissing said opposition, opponent to pay
costs of both courts.
Tho court then adjourned to term in
course. Their honors the Circuit Judges
left on the Wednesday morning train for
their respective homes, via New Orleans.