Case Name: James Desban v. Emma Pickett.-M. Stiewell, Intervenor
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1861-06
Citations: 16 La. Ann. 350
Docket Number: 
Parties: James Desban v. Emma Pickett.—M. Stiewell, Intervenor.
Judges: Vookhtes, <7., absent.
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 350–352

Head Matter:
James Desban v. Emma Pickett.—M. Stiewell, Intervenor.
Tho lessor has a right of pledge on the movable effects of tlie lessee, which arc found upon the property leaded, and may even seize them within fifteen days after they are taken away, if they continue to be the property of the Jesssee, and can bo identified, for the payment of bis rent.
•On a re-hearing — Whenever the provisions in the Code of Practice are contrary or repugnant to those of the Civil Code, the latter shall be considered as repealed, and the former recognized as tho law of the case. 6 N. S. 93. But when laws in pari materia are to be interpreted, that construction is to be preferred which will give eilect to all their provisions, for the reason that the law does not favor repeals by implication. 5. An. 122.
Article 288 of the Code of Practice may be incorporated into article 2679 of the Civil Code, and be consistent and harmonious with it-? provisions.
Appeal from the Third District Court of New Orleans, Duvigneaud, J.
Whittaker'é Fellows, for plaintiff and appellant. Oollens & Wool-ridge, for intervenor.

Opinion:
Land, J.
The plaintiff, the lessor of the defendant, provisionally seized certain household furniture, after its removal from tho leased jDi-emises, and after its sale to the intervenor, for the payment of rent due him.
Judgment was rendered in favor of the intervenor, and the plaintiff has appealed.
The evidence shows that the plaintiff was aware, that the furniture was being removed and delivered to the intervenor, and although present, neither asserted any privilege on the furniture, nor made any objection to its removal and delivery.
The lessor has a right of pledge on the movable effects of the lessee, which are found upon the property leased, and may even seize them within fifteen days after they are taken away, if they continue to be the property of the lessee, and can be identified, for the payment of his rent. C. C. 2675, 2679. But in this case, the furniture had ceased to be the property of the defendant before the seizure was made; and the sale and delivery of it to the intervenor extinguished the lessor's right of privilege. The right of seizure, after the removal, is made to depend on the continued ownership of the lessee.
The evidence is insufficient to establish any fraud on the part of the intervenor, in the purchase of the furniture. The plaintiff had an opportunity of preserving his rights, but by his silence and non-action lost them.
There is no error in the judgment of the lower court; the plaintiff was not entitled to a personal judgment against the defendant, because there was neither a personal citation served on her, nor answer filed by her.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment be affirmed, with costs.