Case Name: WATKINSON, AGENT, &C., vs. BLACK
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1840-02
Citations: 14 La. 351
Docket Number: 
Parties: WATKINSON, AGENT, &C., vs. BLACK.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 14
Pages: 351–352

Head Matter:
WATKINSON, AGENT, &C., vs. BLACK.
Eastern Dist.
February, 1840.
APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, FOR THE PARISH OF -WEST FELICIANA, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING.
An affidavit in which the plaintiff states “ he verily fears, and has good and sufficient cause to believe, the defendant will remove the slaves out of the state, &c.,” is insufficient to support a writ of sequestration.
The plaintiff sues, as agent of one Lewis Jordan, of Tennessee, and charges the defendant with having illegally-taken from the state of Tennessee, and out of the legal possession of the plaintiff several slaves, and which he has brought to the parish of West Feliciana. He alleges, that the defendant is a transient person, without any known domicil, and that he has good reason to fear, and verily believes, that he will remove the said slaves from the state of 'Louisiana, so that the said Jordan will be forever deprived ' of his rights: Wherefore he prays that they be sequestered, &c. The plaintiff declares, in his affidavit, at the foot of the petition, “that he verily fears, and has good and sufficient cause to believe, that the defendant will remove said slaves out of the state of Louisiana.”
The defendant moved to set aside the- sequestration, on the following grounds :
1. The plaintiff sues as agent, and has not produced any authority to show he is authorized to act in that character.
2. There is no sufficient and legal cause sworn to in the affidavit to authorize a sequestration,
3. The affidavit is insufficient in not stating that the defendant was about to remove the slaves out of the state, or jurisdiction of the court.
4. There is not any legal bond given, &c.
The defendant also excepted to the petition, and averred, that the action could not be maintained on various grounds.
The district judge set aside the writ of sequestration, on the first, second and third grounds, relied on in the defendant’s written motion. The plaintiff appealed.
Patterson, for the defendant and appellant,
suggested to the court that the record had not been filed by the appellant; and that he now offered to file it, (three judicial days since the return day having elapsed,) and prayed that the judgment be affirmed, with damages and costs.

Opinion:
Morphy, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
. Plaintiff appeals from a judgment dissolving an order of sequestration, previously granted him, as agent of one Lewis Jordan. The property sequestered consisted of certain slaves in the possession of the defendant. Since this appeal was taken, the plaintiff's petition ,has been dismissed, from which judgment no appeal has been asked. The suit jtself having been dismissed, the sequestration, which is only an accessory proceeding, must have already shared the same fate. The appellee, however, who has brought up the record, asks us to confirm the judgment setting it aside. To this we think he is entitled, and shall rest our affirmance only on one of the grounds assigned by the judge a quo, to wit: the insufficiency of the affidavit, which does not set forth any fear that the defendant, Black, may remove the slaves out of the jurisdiction of the court.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgmeni of the District Court be affirmed, with costs.