American Freehold Land & Mortgage Co. of London, Ltd. v. Heirs & Legal Representatives of Williams

17 So. 847, 47 La. Ann. 1380, 1895 La. LEXIS 645
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided June 21, 1895·No. No. 11,852·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Watkins, J.

This is an appeal from an order of seizure and sale in foreclosure of a mortgage, hence the only question presented for consideration is was there sufficient evidence to authorize the fiat?

[1381] It is matter of which this court will take judicial notice, that the appellants have sued out an injunction against the order and the seizure thereunder since this appeal was obtained and prosecuted, involving the validity of the proceedings in pais — the injunction and appeal having been argued and submitted to this court simultaneously, and the injunction suit having been this day decided. To go back and decide the issues raised on the appeal would be too much like reasoning in a circle.

.We think the purposes of justice would be best subserved by abating the appeal ex proprio motu at appellants’ cost.

Appeal dismissed.

Nicholls, C. J., absent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

American Freehold Land & Mortgage Co. of London, Ltd. v. Heirs & Legal Representatives of Williams, 17 So. 847, 47 La. Ann. 1380, 1895 La. LEXIS 645 (La. 1895).

17 So. 847 (American Freehold Land & Mortgage Co. of London, Ltd. v. Heirs & Legal Representatives of Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stutsman v. Earles
122 N.E. 355 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1919)