Case Name: J. L. ONORATO, AGENT, v. MRS. DORA SANCHEZ
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1917-04-16
Citations: 14 Teiss. 319
Docket Number: No. 7011
Parties: J. L. ONORATO, AGENT, v. MRS. DORA SANCHEZ.
Judges: 
Reporter: Decisions, Court of Appeal, parish of Orleans (Teissier)
Volume: 14
Pages: 319–322

Head Matter:
No. 7011.
J. L. ONORATO, AGENT, v. MRS. DORA SANCHEZ.
Syllabus.
1. Under the provisions of Act 112 of 1916, any error or omission in a judicial bond, or deficiency in form or substance, or in the amount thereof, or the solvency of the surety thereon, may be corrected within two days after notice given to the party furnishing such bond; and this is broad enough to allow a correction in any one case where there has been a bona, fide attempt to furnish a bond and surety according to law.
2. Although an agent cannot make an affidavit for a conservatory writ, unless his principal be absent, yet it is not necessary that the fact of such absence be recited in the affidavit, but such fact may be shown on due hearing.
3. When the tenant abandons the leased premises, the landlord may take possession of and lease the sarnie for account of the tenant so as to reduce the liability of the latter.
Appeal from the Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans, No. 103,264, Division “D”; Honorable Porter Parker, Judge.
Affirmed.
Dart, Kernan & Dart, for plaintiff and appellee.
M. C. Scharff and A. B. Leopold, for defendant and appellant.

Opinion:
His Honor,
JOHN ST. PAUL,
rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:
Appellee moves to dismiss this . appeal on the ground that the solvency of the surety on the appeal bond was not attested by the oath of the appellant; and that although this deficiency was supplied within two days after a rule taken in the lower Court, yet the want of such an affidavit was not such an insufficiency, error or omission as could be corrected under the provisions of Act 112 of 1916.
But we think it was; a bond with surety was actually furnished, and under Section 3 of said Act any deficiency "either as to form or substance" may be cured two days after notice to the appellant.
This language is broad enough to cover any deficiency where there has been a bona fide effort in the first instance to furnish a bond with surety, whatever be the nature of that deficiency whether in form or in substance, and whether relating to the amount of the bond or the solvency of the surety. The motion is therefore denied.