Case Name: Emily J. Robertson v. Thomas J. Emerson and George F. Porter
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1874-04
Citations: 26 La. Ann. 351
Docket Number: No. 3383
Parties: Emily J. Robertson v. Thomas J. Emerson and George F. Porter.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 26
Pages: 351–353

Head Matter:
No. 3383.
Emily J. Robertson v. Thomas J. Emerson and George F. Porter.
The plaintiff in this case was not a party to the suit in the fifth District Court, the exeeu- • tion of whose judgment she has injoined. Under the Act of 1870, which organized the-Eighth District Court, that court has the power to issue the injunction plaintiff has-, prayed for. Perhaps, under that statute, she might have applied to the fifth Distriot'. Court, hut it is thought that she could also seek relief from the Eighth District Court.
Appeal from the Eighth District Court, parish of Orleans. Dibble, J.
Wm. Grant and Wm. H. Hunt, for plaintiff and appellee. O. F. Duele, curator ad hoc, for G. E. Porter, defendant and appellant.

Opinion:
Morgan,
J. The plaintiff in this injunction was not a party to the smt in the Eifth District Court, nor is she attempting to interfere with the judgment therein rendered. She claims to be entitled to itsbeneñts, and to prevent the plaintiff from executing the same to her prejudice. The act of 1870, which organized the Eighth District Court, gave to that court the power to grant injunctions, but at the same time-declared that the act should not be so construed as to prevent any judge or court from issuing an injunction to stay or regulate the execution of any order of seizure granted or judgment rendered by said, judge or court. Perhaps, under this statute, she might have applied* to the Eifth District Court, but we think she could also seek reliefc' from the Eighth District Court.
On the merits, we think the reasons of the district judge correct, and, for the reasons assigned by him, the judgment is affirmed.