Bartley v. Sallier

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Bartley v. Sallier

45 So. 593, 120 La. 743, 1908 La. LEXIS 561

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJanuary 9, 1908

DocketNo. 16,860

StatusPublished

This text of 45 So. 593 (Bartley v. Sallier) 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

Bartley v. Sallier, 45 So. 593, 120 La. 743, 1908 La. LEXIS 561 (La. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

PROVOSTY, J.

The present litigation is before this court for the third time. See Sallier v. Bartley, 113 La. 400, 37 South. 6; Bartley v. Sallier et al., 118 La. 94, 42 South. 657. In the latter case, which was a petitory action, the defendants were decreed to be the owners of the property in controversy; but the plaintiff was found to have possessed in good faith and to be entitled to the improvements placed by him on the property. However, for reasons stated, the court was unable to give judgment for the improvements and relegated the matter to another suit, and the present suit has accordingly been brought. The district court gave plaintiffs judgment; but the Court of Appeal rejected their demand. The Court of Appeal considered that the judgment of this court in the former suit was not res judicata for two reasons— that it nonsuited plaintiffs, and that the present plaintiffs are not the same persons, but are the transferees of the rights of the plaintiffs in the former suit. On the facts the Court of Appeal found that the improvements had been placed upon the property in bad faith. This court thought differently on the former trial, and so announced, and sees no reason for changing that opinion.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of the Court of Appeal be, and the same is, hereby set aside, and the judgment of the district court reinstated, and that defendants pay the costs of the application to this court.

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

PROVOSTY, J.

The present litigation is before this court for the third time. See Sallier v. Bartley, 113 La. 400, 37 South. 6; Bartley v. Sallier et al., 118 La. 94, 42 South. 657. In the latter case, which was a petitory action, the defendants were decreed to be the owners of the property in controversy; but the plaintiff was found to have possessed in good faith and to be entitled to the improvements placed by him on the property. However, for reasons stated, the court was unable to give judgment for the improvements and relegated the matter to another suit, and the present suit has accordingly been brought. The district court gave plaintiffs judgment; but the Court of Appeal rejected their demand. The Court of Appeal considered that the judgment of this court in the former suit was not res judicata for two reasons— that it nonsuited plaintiffs, and that the present plaintiffs are not the same persons, but are the transferees of the rights of the plaintiffs in the former suit. On the facts the Court of Appeal found that the improvements had been placed upon the property in bad faith. This court thought differently on the former trial, and so announced, and sees no reason for changing that opinion.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of the Court of Appeal be, and the same is, hereby set aside, and the judgment of the district court reinstated, and that defendants pay the costs of the application to this court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 So. 593, 120 La. 743, 1908 La. LEXIS 561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartley-v-sallier-la-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack