Case Name: GRUBBS v. PIERSON et al.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1903-02-02
Citations: 111 La. 101
Docket Number: No. 14,694
Parties: GRUBBS v. PIERSON et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 111
Pages: 101–103

Head Matter:
(35 South. 474.)
No. 14,694.
GRUBBS v. PIERSON et al.
(Feb. 2, 1903.)
APPEAL—DISMISSAL—POSSESSORY ACTION-DISCLAIMER OP TITLE.
1. Unless it be very evident that the appeal should be dismissed on the ground averred, action on the motion to dismiss will be deferred until the case is examined on the merits; and then, if good grounds are shown to dismiss the appeal, it will be dismissed.
“Grounds for dismissal may he considered on the merits.’’ Brown v. Land Company, 23 South. 292, 49 La. Ann. 1779; Succession of Fortier,- 26 South. 554, 51 La. Ann. 1562.
On the Merits.
2. Where a suit Is brought against a succession for the recovery of real estate and for the cancellation of a note executed by plaintiff, and the succession, after asserting title to the real estate, amends its answer, and, disclaiming title, alleges that said real estate had been sold at tax sale to a third person, who had sold to another, who in turn had been put in possession by an order of the court in which said suit is filed, rendered in a proceeding which is made part of said answer and offered in evidence, the disclaimer referred to is an insufficient basis for a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, decreeing him to be the owner of the property, and authorizing the cancellation of the note in question.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans; George H. Théard, Judge.
Action by Gus J. Grubbs against Alfred Pierson and the succession of Fahey. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant succession of Fahey appeals.
Reversed.
Dinkelspiel & Hart, for appellant. Albert Voorhies and Hamilton Nnma Gautier, for appellee.
Rehearing denied December 14, 1903.

Opinion:
On Motion to Dismiss the Appeal.
BREAUX, J.
Plaintiff obtained a writ of injunction to restrain Widow Fahey, administratrix, from proceeding with the sale of certain immovable property, of which he claims to be the owner, and asked that she and Alfred Pierson be cited contradictorily, with whom he wishes to be recognized as owner of the property, on the ground that defendants had no right as owners, that Pierson was only an interposed party, and that he (plaintiff) was the owner.
Pierson, in his answer, admitted that he was only the nominal purchaser from Fahey, the late husband of the administratrix.
Mi's. Fahey, the administratrix, answered, controverting plaintiff's demand at first. Afterward, in a subsequent or a second answer, she averred that the property had been sold prior to plaintiff's suit, without her knowledge, for taxes, and that she was no longer the owner. Whereupon the judge of the district court perpetuated the writ of injunction which had been issued, and decreed plaintiff to be the owner of the property in dispute, and further authorized plaintiff to obtain the cancellation of the mortgage inscription thereon.
The administratrix applied for a new trial, averring substantially that the judgment was broader than defendants' admissions warranted. Motion for a new trial was overruled. From the judgment the administratrix appeals.
In this court plaintiff moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the defendant and appellant, Mrs. Fahey, has by her disclaimer confessed judgment, as appears by her pleadings.
We have examined the record, and left it not convinced that we should at this time dismiss the appeal. Unless it clearly appears that the appeal should be dismissed, the motion for its dismissal should not prevail, under repeated decisions. It must be referred to the merits on the appeal.
We think this motion should not be acted on at this time. If there is good ground for its dismissal, the appeal will in time be dismissed. It will be time enough to consider that matter after the case will have been examined in all of its details.
At this time we must decline to sustain the motion to dismiss.
The motion will be considered with the merits of the appeal.