Borne v. Porter

4 Rob. 57
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedFebruary 15, 1843
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 4 Rob. 57 (Borne v. Porter) 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
Borne v. Porter, 4 Rob. 57 (La. 1843).

Opinion

Bullard, J.

The appellant, having sued out of the District Court, an injunction to stay proceedings on four writs of fieri facias, issued at the suit of different parties, and three of which were to enforce judgments rendered in the Parish Court, the defendants were permitted to sever in their defence, and the injunction having been dissolved, she has appealed.

We are of opinion the court did not err, in permitting the parties to sever in their defence. There was no privity between them. Each had his separate judgment, which he was seeking to enforce, although the sheriff had levied on the same property in order to satisfy all the writs.

It is equally clear, that the District Court was without authority to arrest, by injunction, process issued from the Parish Court. This question was fully considered and decided in the case of [58]*58Oger v. Daunoy, 7 Mart. N. S. 656. The present case does not present an exception to the general rule recognized in that.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Gladding v. United States
37 Ct. Cl. 262 (Court of Claims, 1902)
Brown v. Brown
30 La. Ann. 506 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Rob. 57, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/borne-v-porter-la-1843.