Dobson v. Kelly

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Dobson v. Kelly

1 Gunby 70

DecidedJuly 1, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Gunby 70 (Dobson v. Kelly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dobson v. Kelly, 1 Gunby 70 (La. Ct. App. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

In this case, Judges Mayo and Farmer first decided that the price of horses sold to a farmer was not a privilege on the crop; that the stock were used, not for one but for many crops, and that it is only such things as are consumed or enter into the crop that are secured by a privilege and embraced in the term “ necessary supplies.” 16 An. 306. A rehearing was granted, and at a subsequent, term, Judge Mayo and Judge E. C. Montgomery, the latter sitting in place of Judge Gunby, recused, held : That the price of mules is secured by privilege on the crop, under authority of Farror vs. Rowley, 3 An. 276.

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

In this case, Judges Mayo and Farmer first decided that the price of horses sold to a farmer was not a privilege on the crop; that the stock were used, not for one but for many crops, and that it is only such things as are consumed or enter into the crop that are secured by a privilege and embraced in the term “ necessary supplies.” 16 An. 306. A rehearing was granted, and at a subsequent, term, Judge Mayo and Judge E. C. Montgomery, the latter sitting in place of Judge Gunby, recused, held : That the price of mules is secured by privilege on the crop, under authority of Farror vs. Rowley, 3 An. 276.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Gunby 70, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dobson-v-kelly-lactapp-1885.