Case Name: Bank of America v. Septime Fortier. Third opposition of E. J. Gay & Co. Third opposition of Citizens' Bank
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1875-03
Citations: 27 La. 243
Docket Number: No. 5567
Parties: Bank of America v. Septime Fortier. Third opposition of E. J. Gay & Co. Third opposition of Citizens’ Bank.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 27
Pages: 243–246

Head Matter:
No. 5567.
Bank of America v. Septime Fortier. Third opposition of E. J. Gay & Co. Third opposition of Citizens’ Bank.
Appellant gave no bond under the order for a suspensive appeal, but gave bond after getting an order for a devolutive one. This was not an abandonment of an appeal. There is no appeal until the bond is given, it matters not how many orders of appeal have been granted.
As the sheriff is a mere depositary, in this case, of the funds sought to be distributed, he has no interest in the controversy, and need not be made a party to this appeal.
The furnishers of supplies or cash actually used for the cultivation of a plantation have a privilege on the crops of that year, and it can not be divested by any prior mortgage, whether legal, conventional, or judicial, or by any seizure and sale of the land while such crops are on it, and such privilege bears on the growing crop.
As against the Citizens’ Bank holding a conventional mortgage recorded in January, 1868, •E. J. Gay & Co. have no preference for the supplies they furnished, the defendant from January till April 23,1873, because their claim was not recorded on'the day the contract was entered into. Privileges are stricti juris, and persons desiring to affect third parties therewith must register them in the manner required by law.
Construing articles 3273 and 3274 Revised Code, so as to give effect to both, the conclusion is that privileges have effect as to third persons generally from the date of their registry; but, for a privilege to have a preference over an existing mortgage, it must be recorded on the day the contract out of which it arises was entered into.
APPEAL from the Fourth Judicial District Court, parish of St. James.
Flagg, J. Johnson & Denis, for plaintiff and appellee. Barrow <& Pope, for E. J. G-ay & Co., third opponents and appellees. A, Pitot, Legendre & Boché, for the Citizens’ Bank, third opponent and appellant.

Opinion:
Wyly, J.
This is a controversy between Edward J. Gay & Co., privilege creditors for $1847 43, and the Citizens' Bank, a conventional mortgage creditor for $6000, for the balance of the proceeds remaining after the payment of plaintiff's mortgage, under which the Felicité plantation, belonging to the defendant, was sold on the seventh of June, 1873.
Plaintiff bought the mortgaged property for $20,500, and after satisfying its own judgment, costs-and taxes, there remained $2339 69, which plaintiff retained to pay the proportion of taxes on said property for 1873 up to-the time of the adjudication, and to be applied to such privilege and mortgage creditors as might be entitled to it.
It is conceded that plaintiff is entitled to apply $284 90 of the fund on hand to the payment of the taxes,for 1873, leaving $2054 79 as the sum in controversy between Edward J. Gay & Co. and the Citizens' Bank.
The court below decided that Edward J. Gay & Co. are entitled to a preference over the Citizens' Bank in the distribution of this fund, and the Citizens' Bank has appealed.
Edward J. Gay & Co. moved to dismiss the appeal :
First — Because appellant abandoned its suspensive appeal and, therefore, had no right to take this devolutive appeal.
Second — Because the sheriff has not been cited.
Third — Because the certificate of the clerk to the transcript is not sufficient.
Appellant gave no bond under the order for a suspensive appeal,'but gave bond after getting an order for a devolutive appeal. This was not an abandonment of an appeal. There is no appeal until the bond is given, it matters not how many orders of appeal have been granted. 20 An. 236.
As the sheriff is a mere depositary of the funds sought to be distributed, he has no interest in the controversy, and need not be made a party to this appeal. 20 An. 283; 1 An. 205; 2 An. 232; 5 An. 668; 11 An. 486. .
The defect in the clerk's certificate to the transcript has been corrected under a writ of certiorari issued by this court.
The motion is therefore denied.