Case Name: Dr. C. A. Gaudet vs. Louise Dumoulin, His Wife
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1897-05-31
Citations: 49 La. Ann. 984
Docket Number: No. 12,439
Parties: Dr. C. A. Gaudet vs. Louise Dumoulin, His Wife.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 49
Pages: 984–988

Head Matter:
No. 12,439.
Dr. C. A. Gaudet vs. Louise Dumoulin, His Wife.
On Motion to dismiss.
It is not necessary that the name of the clerk be inserted in an appeal bond. The bond made payable to the clerk of the Oiyil District Court and his successor in office is sufficient.
On the Merits.
Parole evidence is not admissible to proye title to real estate.
APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Bightor, J.
Lauque & Pomes for Plaintiff, Defendant in Rule, Appellant.
Clegg & Quintero for Defendant, Plaintiff in Rule, Appellee. ,
Submitted on briefs May 14, 1897.
Opinion handed down May 31, 1897.
On the 11th of January, 1897, Mrs. Louise Dumoulin, wife of Dr. ■Gaudet, suggested to the court that she was separate from bed and board from her husband by judgment of court; that on the 18th of February, 1896, an order was issued by the court, decreeing the sale of certain real estate described therein; that the sale was made after due advertisement pursuant to the order; that the property was adjudicated to T. Gaudet, acting for Dr. O. A. Gaudet (her husband) ; that Dr. 0. A. Gaudet, through T. Gaudet, became the purchaser of the property for twenty thousand two hundred dollars; that said sum was due and payable by said Dr. 0. A. Gaudet, and should be ■deposited with the notary to whom the parties to the cause had been referred for a partition. Upon these suggestions, the court ordered that Dr. C. A. Gaudet show cause why he should not be ordered and compelled to deposit with the notary, Charles J. Théard, the purchase price of the property adjudicated to T. Gaudet for-the said 0. A. Gaudet at the auctioneer’s sale.
The District Court, on trial of the rule, decreed Dr. C. A. Gaudet to be the real adjudicates and purchaser of the property sold at public sale under agreement of all parties to the suit and pursuant to •the order of court, of February 18, 1896, and ordering him to forthwith deposit in the hands of Théard, notary, the price and sum of twenty thousand two hundred dollars, being the sum bid by him in the purchase of the property referred to. Dr. 0. A. Gaudet appealed suspensively from this judgment, furnishing a bond for four thousand dollars, the amount fixed by the court.
Appellee moved to dismiss the appeal, on the grounds that the amount of the bond was too small to sustain the same, the judgment being for the deposit of twenty-two thousand two hundred dollars, while the bond furnished did not exceed (as required bylaw) by one-half the amount of the judgment appealed from, and the appellant had only prayed for and only been allowed a suspensive appeal, and on the further grounds that the bond was not made payable to the proper person named by law; that it was not dated, and that it was. not executed before any competent authority in the presence of witnesses and was a mere private writing.

Opinion:
On the Motion to Dismiss.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Nicholls, C. J.
The amount of the bond furnished being that, fixed by the court would sustain a devolutive, if not a suspensive-appeal. The bond is made payable to the clerk of the Civil District Court and his successor in office. It is not necessary that his name be mentioned. The date of the bond is sufficiently fixed by the recitals of the bond and its filing in the District Court. It is not claimed that the signatures to the bond are not genuine. The fact that the bond did not per se prove that fact would not be a ground for dismissal.
The motion is denied.