Case Name: ARDEN vs. SOILEAU
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1840-09
Citations: 16 La. 28
Docket Number: 
Parties: ARDEN vs. SOILEAU.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 28–29

Head Matter:
ARDEN vs. SOILEAU.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH DISTRICT, FOR THE PARISH OF ST. LANDRY, THE JUDGE OF THE SIXTH PRESIDING.
An agent may possess for his principal, and his possession is sufficient to maintain the possessory action.
This is a possessory action. The plaintiff alleges that he is owner, has the lawful possession and right of actual pos session, of a certain improvement on the public land which he had purchased, and had placed one Coe thereon to occupy said improvement. That Coe resided on it until a few days before suit, and left it. That he went to reside there himself, but found the defendant in possession, who refuses to leave the premises, and claims the right of possession. He prays to be put in peaceable posséssion, and allowed damages for the illegal acts of defendant.
The defendant pleaded a general denial, and denied specially that the plaintiff ever had possession or was dispossessed within the year previous to suit.
The plaintiff proved he had bought the improvement and placed Coe on the place to keep possession; that, when he heard Coe had left it, witness went to take possession for plaintiff and found defendant in possession, saying he bought it from Coe.
There was judgment for the plaintiff, and defendant appealed.
T. H. and W,. B. Lewis, for the plaintiff.
Morse, for defendant.

Opinion:
Simon, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
This case presents no question of any importance. The facts of possession, necessary to maintain this action, have been clearly and satisfactorily proven; and it cannot be doubted, that an agent may possess for his principal, particularly when, as in this case, he has been specially appointed for that purpose ; qui facit per alium, facit per se.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed, with costs.