Case Name: Amelie Theriot vs. P. E. Michel
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1876-02
Citations: 28 La. Ann. 107
Docket Number: No. 6100
Parties: Amelie Theriot vs. P. E. Michel.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 107–109

Head Matter:
No. 6100.
Amelie Theriot vs. P. E. Michel.
Tho motion to dismiss this appeal on the ground that there is no legal order of appeal, the judge not having signed the order, has no force. Tho appeal ivas taken by motion in open court, and the order rendered and ontered on tho minutes did not require tho signature of tho judge to give it validity.
The plaintiff claims by virtue of a judgment to havo a lien and privilege for supplies furnished on a plantation owned and cultivated in partnership by and between himself, Mrs. widow Michel, and P.-E. Michol, her son,which privilege and lien he maintains to exist, for tho amount of his judgment, on tho share owned by Mrs. Michel in said tract, and he prays to have it enforced against the said share and interest of his debtor in said plantation, which said debtor .has fraudulently transferred to hor son by an act of sale alleged to be null and void!
This court is of opinion that there was no partnership in the land cultivated by Mrs. Michol, by plaintiff, and P. E. Michel, but that thoywere joint owners of it. It was used by common consent for carrying on tho cultivation of sugar through a partnership which was dissolved by tho seizure and sale of P. E. Michel’s portion in the land by one of his creditors, but the land cultivated by tho partnership was no part of said partnership. It was only the use of the land which was brought into partnership.
Tho doctrine followed on this point has been applied by this court to the ease of part owners of steamboats employed In carrying persons and property for hire, and it has been held, in the absence of an express stipulation to tho contrary, that the use of the steamboat only is brought into the partnership, and not the property and ownership of the boat, which remains in the part owners as tonants in common, subject,however,to the privileges which the law granted in certain' cases to the creditors of tlio partnership.
As to tho plaintiff’s allegation of a fraudulent sale made by Mrs. Michel to the defendant, said plaintiff, after having by a formal authentic act recognized defendant’s title, is estopped from now attacking it, and from seeking to subject the land he holds under it to the payment of his judgment against Mrs. Michel.
APPEAL irom tho Eifteenth Judicial District Court, parish of Terre-bonne. Beattie, J.
Bwrguieres & Suthon, for plaintiff and appellant.'
Charles W. DuBoy, for defendant and appellee.

Opinion:
Taliafeero, J.
In this case there is a motion to dismiss on the ground that there is no legal order of appeal, the judge not having signed the order.
The objection has no force. The appeal was taken by motion in open-court, and the order rendered and entered on the minutes did not require the signature of the judge to give it validity. The motion to dismiss is overruled.