Case Name: Russell & Hall vs. Ellen Keefe et al.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1876-12
Citations: 28 La. Ann. 928
Docket Number: No. 4986
Parties: Russell & Hall vs. Ellen Keefe et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 928–932

Head Matter:
No. 4986.
Russell & Hall vs. Ellen Keefe et al.
The laches complained oí in regard to the statément oí fact, if any there be, can not be attributed to the appellant, but to the judge a quo. The appellant applied to the judge to make the statement of facts in time, and the failure to make it before granting the appeal can not be considered just cause to dismiss it.
To annul a sale for fraud or simulation, the original debtor must be a party to the suit only where the debt has not been previously liquidated by a judgment. In this case, plaintiffs had obtained a judgment against the transferrer of the property in question before this suit was brought.
It is true that plaintiffs contracted with the transferrer anterior to the transfer of the property to Ellen Keefe. But it is also true that'her title appears not to have been recorded, and thus plaintiffs could not be charged with notice of the transfer.
Here a longer time elapsed between the pretended sale and the time when this suit was tried than was necessary to deliver the property, and the pretended vendor remained in possession of the property. This placed the'onus of establishing the bonafides of the transaction upon the transferee. There is no evidence of good faith in the record.
APPEAL from the Sixth District Court, parish of Orleans. , Saucier, J.
John M. Bonner, for plaintiffe and appellees.
John N. Healy and Bichard Shackelford, for defendant and appellant.

Opinion:
On Motion to Dismiss.
Ludeling, 0. J.
A motion to dismiss this appeal has been made on the grounds following:
That the transcript does not show that appellees have been cited; that the transcript is incomplete; that the statement of facts made by the judge was made to.o late, having been made after the appeal was granted.
The first objection was waived by making the second and third objections, even if the appellees had not been cited. But they were properly cited.
Second — The transcript was connected by certiorari.
Third — The laches, complained of in regard to the statement of fact, if any there be, can not be attributed to the appellant, but to the judge a quo. Tbe appellant applied to the judge to make the statement of facts in time, and the failure to make it before granting the appeal can not be considered just cause to dismiss the appeal.
The motion is therefore refused.