Case Name: A. V. Davis et al. vs. Mrs. Catherine Young
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1883-05
Citations: 35 La. Ann. 739
Docket Number: No. 8848
Parties: A. V. Davis et al. vs. Mrs. Catherine Young.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 739–741

Head Matter:
No. 8848.
A. V. Davis et al. vs. Mrs. Catherine Young.
There exists no essential, difference between a discontinuance and a voluntary non-suit. The latter does not interrupt prescription, whatever the intention to the contrary may appear. It is equivalent to an abandonment.
A plaintiff is entitled to make either, and the Court is -bound to grant that made before judgment. However, when made and. alio wed, such motion cannot, in a oase in whioh areconventional demand has "been made, destroy or affect the right of the plaintiff in reconvention to a prosecution and trial of his demand.
A plaintiff in reconvention has the right to oppose any such motion which would produce such effect.
Where the motion is allowed during the course of trial, the rights of the plaintiff in reconvention must he reversed, and where he insists upon it, the trial of his demand must he proceeded with as though the withdrawal had not taken place.
ÁEPEAL from the Ninth District Court, Parish of Concordia.’ Eough, J.
Wade B. Young for Plaintiffs and Appellees.
F. P. White and Boatner & Boatner for Defendant and Appellant.

Opinion:
On Motion to Dismiss.
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Bermudez, C. J.
The motion • to • dismiss cannot prevail. The appeal is from a judgment of non-suit, which disposes of the case, and is suoh as can be appealed from. This is no new question. Motion overruled.