Case Name: R. H. Howell vs. M. Cohen
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1880
Citations: 1 Mann. Unrep. Cas. 244
Docket Number: No. 856
Parties: R. H. Howell vs. M. Cohen.
Judges: 
Reporter: Unreported cases heard and determined by the Supreme Court of Louisiana, from January 8, 1877, to April, 1880
Volume: 1
Pages: 244–247

Head Matter:
No. 856.
R. H. Howell vs. M. Cohen.
The signature to au appeal bond by one who is uot a principal nor a witness will be held to he that of a surety, although he is not so described.
There is no law giving a privilege on a right of servitude. Recording a note, given for one-half the cost of a common wall does not create a privilege upon the wall. Even when the note is merged in a judgment which expressly recognises a privilege, such privilege will not exist to the prejudice of mortgage creditors.
When the prayer of the petition is not for a personal judgment on a note, but simply that the defendant be condemned to pay it or surrender the property upon which the privilege is claimed, no personal judgment will be rendered.
Appeal from the District Court for Caddo. Boarman, J.
Wise & Herndon for Plaintiff. Looney & Elstner for Defendant Appellant.

Opinion:
White, J.
The appellee moves to dismiss this appeal on the ground that ' ' no one appears to have signed what purports to be the appeal bond in the capacity as sureties." The bond is in the usual form except that in its body where the name of the surety is habitually written there is a blank. It is signed by. the appellant and following his signature are those of three others without anything being added to designate them as sureties.
In a recent case, decided since the last term here, we have passed on the regularity of a bond for all purposes practically identical with the one now in question and our conclusion was that the irregularities complained of therein were not fatal. Succession of J. W. Lyons ante.
The motion is therefore denied.