Case Name: Samuel D. Browne vs. John W. Clarke
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1883-03
Citations: 35 La. Ann. 290
Docket Number: No. 8482
Parties: Samuel D. Browne vs. John W. Clarke.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 290–292

Head Matter:
No. 8482.
Samuel D. Browne vs. John W. Clarke.
A case having heen ordered to he stricken from the docket of the Supreme Court under the erroneous impression that the record contained no order of appeal will, on proper showing, he reinstated, as the order complained of is not a final decree in the cause.
A writ of provisional seizure was properly dissolved where the lessee offered to deliver cottou to the lessor, then iu the ginhouse, sufficient to pay the rent, or to give a draft for the same, the offer being made on the day the rent fell due.
3$Tor is the lessor entitled to the writ for the value of tbe repairs which the lessee failed to make, where no demand for any specific amount was made on this account, and where it appears from tbe contract of lease it was stipulated, that on the payment of money rental the lessee was authorized to ship or dispose pf his orop.
APPEAL from the Eighth District Court, Parish of Madison. Delowy, J.
S. P. Wells for Plaintiff and Appellant.
J. 0. Seale for Defendant and Appellee.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Poché, J.
Plaintiff moves that, as the appeal taken by him in this case was erroneously dismissed by us, on the mistaken impression that the record contained no order of appeal, the ease be reinstated for trial on the merits of his appeal,
Justice to ourselves requires the statement that the order of appeal was not correctly indorsed and was inscribed in the transcript many pages before the judgment and with the evidence iu the case.
A reference to the opinion rendered in the premises shows that the appeal was ndt dismissed, but that the case was merely ordered to be stricken from our docket. Hence, no final decree has been rendered in tbe case, and for that reason plaintiff's motion can be entertained, even though tbe delay for applying for a rehearing has expired.
It is, therefore, ordered, that our previous order removing this case from the docket be rescinded; and it is now ordered that the case be reinstated for a trial of the merits of the appeal.