Case Name: The State v. The Judge of the Court of Probates of New Orleans
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1842-06
Citations: 2 Rob. 452
Docket Number: 
Parties: Same Case—Application for a Re-hearing.
Judges: 
Reporter: Robinson
Volume: 2
Pages: 452–453

Head Matter:
Same Case—Application for a Re-hearing.
Where the security, given within the ten days to obtain a suspensive appeal, and accepted by the judge, is afterwards rejected, the appeal should not be dismissed without allowing the party time to procure other security.
C. M. Jones, for the curator,
for a re-hearing, urged that the court had misconstrued the decision in Lafon v. Lafon's Executors. The original judgment, from which an appeal was sought in that case, had been rendered against the executors personally, and the court correctly held that they could not be sureties on the appeal bond. Had the judgment been against the estate, they would have been sufficient. Tilghman lost his residence in the State from which he moved, as soon as he left it with the intention of fixing himself in this State. The decision of this court, declaring that he could not acquire a residence within this State before the expiration of twelve months, will have the effect to disfranchise him, for a time, of the privileges and immunities of citizenship.

Opinion:
Gaeland, J.
Upon further consideration of this cause, on the application for a re-hearing, the court is of opinion that some relief should be extended to the petitioner. He gave a bond and security within the ten days to obtain a suspensive appeal, which was accepted by the judge, and afterwards the security was rejected. The judge should have permitted the party to give other security on the bond, and not have dismissed the appeal entirely.
It is, therefore, ordered and decreed, that a mandamus issue commanding the judge of the Court of Probates to send up the appeal heretofore granted by him, if the appellant shall give good and sufficient security on tbe bond filed, within five days after the recording of this judgment in the said Court of Pro-, bates.