Aucoin v. Guillot

10 La. Ann. 124
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedFebruary 15, 1855
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 10 La. Ann. 124 (Aucoin v. Guillot) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Aucoin v. Guillot, 10 La. Ann. 124 (La. 1855).

Opinion

Slidell, C. J.

The defendant is surety in an official bond given in favor of the District Judge by a father and natural tutor, conditioned for the faithful administration of his trust. The Judge had no lawful authority to require such bond from the father, and therefore the court below correctly held the bond invalid. The maxim that as aman consents to bind himself so shall he be bound is not fairly applicable to such a judicial bond, which is not in legal contemplation purely voluntary, but is required by the Judge from the parties as the condition for the exercise of a function. If he be entitled to such exorcise ■without bond, its judicial ex parte exaction is illegal, and the bond must therefore justly be deemed inoperative against the surety.

Judgment affirmed with costs.

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

Related

In Re Wyly's Tutorship
186 So. 55 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1938)
Town of Merton v. Hansen
229 N.W. 53 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1930)
Watkins v. Minter
180 S.W. 227 (Texas Supreme Court, 1915)
Succession of Campbell
61 So. 777 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1913)
Dudley v. Rice
95 N.W. 936 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1903)
Leona I., M. & C. Co. v. Roberts
62 Tex. 615 (Texas Supreme Court, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 La. Ann. 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aucoin-v-guillot-la-1855.