St. Landry democrat., 1882-07-15
Supreme Court Decisions.

a mercantile business on her own ac-
count, and contracted debt by purchas-
ing goods from plaintiff. Plaintiff sued
out a writ of attachment against de-
PENDANTS goods. During the suit de-
PENDANT died, leaving minor heirs. De-
PENDANTS surviving husband was APP
pointed tutor, and the plaintiff obtained
q Judgment, from which he appealed
Judgment affirmed.
John B. Marsh VS.. Mrs. r. G.. Palfrey.
Appeal from st. Mary. "This case is
purely question of fact" The judg-
ment of the lower court, in favor of
defendant, is reversed.
State of Louisiana ex rel. VIM. E.
Seymour liq., VS.. Judges of the Third
Circuit Court. Appeal from ST. Landry
The question decided in this case is
contained in the syllabus accompany
ing the opinion: ''1n a contest over
a fund in the hands Of the sheriff, rea-
lized under execution, the circuit courts
have no jurisdiction if the demand of
plaintiff exceeded one thousand dollars,
although the amount claimed on inter
vention or third opposition be less than
one thousand dollars. In such cases
the jurisdiction of the appellate tribu.
nal must be tested by the amount
claim of third opponent or intervenOr."
State of Louisiana VS.. Platte, colored.
Appeal from Lafayette. The defen-
dant, on trial for larceny, was sentenced
to ten months imprisonment at hard
labor in the ,penitentiary. and appealed
from the ruling of the judge refusing
to hear evidence offered by him relat-
ing to the character of his alleged
confession implied in an offer to COM
promise the otfense. Held, that this
evidence was improperly rejected, and
the Judgment was reversed, and the
case remanded for further proceedings.
City of New Orleans, appellant, VS.. D..
from New Orleans. On ii suit for taxes
due the City, 1t was decided on an ex-
ception that the City had no right of
action, as the provisions of the consti-
tuition in force prohibit the judicial
collection of taxes due the cor
poration. The articles of the con-
stitution relied upon by the defense,
are 31O and 21S, which read !:
"There shall be no forfeiture of prop
erty for the non payment OF taxes,
State, levee, parochial or municipal );
but at the expiration of the year in
which they are due, the collector shall,
without suit, and after giving notice to
the delinquent, in the manner to be
prescribed by law, (Which shall not be
Nv publication except in case of I'M
known owner,) advertise for sale the
property on which the taxes are due, in
the manner provided by judicial sales,"
etc. Gail the articles and provisions of
the constitution regulating and rela
ting to the collection of State taxes and
tax sales, shall also apply to and regu-
late the collection of parish, district and
municipal taxes" 1t is decided in this
case, that until the Legislature has
prescribed the manner OF collecting
taxes under the present constitution,
the method of collecting under the pre-
vious costitution shall continue; there
fore the .judment appealed from is re-
versed, and the case remanded for fur
ther procedure.
Vincent Boagni ct ais. VS.. Lizzie Cor
don, wife, ct ais. Appeal from st. Lan-
dry. The appeal in this case is dis
missed, because the amount in dispute
does not exceed $1,000; as interest al
though accrued at date Of suit, cannot
be counted in estimating the "matter in
dispute" as to its appealable character.
Estate of Susan Elizabeth Andrus, ex
rel. Vincent Boagni ct ais, appellees, VS..
Clinton B. Andrus, admir-, appellant.
Appeal from St. Landry. The deceased,
during marriage, bought plantation
on credit, against which the opponent
or plaintiff in this case had promissory
notes for the purchase price. The plan
tatiion was sold to pay the notes, but
failed to satisfy the Judgment by $780,
66. The administrator failed to put
this balance on his tableau, and its
homologation was opposed. The lower
court ruled that it should be placed on
the tableau, and be paid in preference
to certain other claims already on the
tableau. From this Judgment the ad-
ministrator appealed: The Supreme
Court reverses the judment in this res
pect, and the following syllabus con-
tains the substance of the Courts opin-
ion The legal representatives of a de-
ceased married woman have the right
to urge the nullity of judgments rem
dered against her, for the enforcement
of contracts entered into by her during
coverture. A married woman will not
be estopped or precluded under Art.
612 c.. P from demanding the nullity of
a Judgment, because she did not oppose
the execution of the same, if such exc
cution issued during the marriage,
while she was net yet sui gene,is. A
purchase made exclusively on credit by
a married woman, who is not shown to
have been separate in property from her
husband, or to have separate property
yielding paraphernal revenue. of which
She has retained the administration,
will he held as a purchaser by the COM
munity, for which the wife was prohib-
tied from binding herself or her prop
erty. Aiudgment rendered against her
on nromissory notes executed by her
for such purchase price, cannot be en-
forced if resisted.
Us, Copes VS.. U. A. Guilbeau, sh eriff
ct ais, Alexandra Declouet ct ais. VS.
II A Gnilheau. sheriff. ct ais. Appeal