Dobson v. Thompson

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Dobson v. Thompson

1 Gunby 72

DecidedJuly 1, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Gunby 72 (Dobson v. Thompson) 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. Thompson, 1 Gunby 72 (La. Ct. App. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Talbot Stillman, J.,

ad hoc. An order of appeal which is not perfected by bond, does not prevent the appellant from obtaining another order of appeal within twelve months from the signing of the judgment.

2. A surety on a release bond taken in a sequestration suit cannot, when sued on the bond, set up the falsity of the allegations upon which the sequestration was obtained without alleging fraud. 27 An. 329; 21 An. 118; 20 An. 174; 12 An. 341; 3 An. 222; 8 R. 123; 4 N. S. 88.

3. Where the furnisher, of supplies sequesters the cotton of his debtor, and the latter bonds it, with his lessor as surety, the surety when sued on the bond cannot set up that he had a privilege on the cotton superior to plaintiff’s; he should have asserted his privilege by provisional seizure or by intervention in the sequestration suit before the property was bonded. 11 An. 528.

4. The expenses of the surety in gathering and preparing the .cotton for market after its release should be deducted from its proceeds chargeable to him.

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

Talbot Stillman, J.,

ad hoc. An order of appeal which is not perfected by bond, does not prevent the appellant from obtaining another order of appeal within twelve months from the signing of the judgment.

2. A surety on a release bond taken in a sequestration suit cannot, when sued on the bond, set up the falsity of the allegations upon which the sequestration was obtained without alleging fraud. 27 An. 329; 21 An. 118; 20 An. 174; 12 An. 341; 3 An. 222; 8 R. 123; 4 N. S. 88.

3. Where the furnisher, of supplies sequesters the cotton of his debtor, and the latter bonds it, with his lessor as surety, the surety when sued on the bond cannot set up that he had a privilege on the cotton superior to plaintiff’s; he should have asserted his privilege by provisional seizure or by intervention in the sequestration suit before the property was bonded. 11 An. 528.

4. The expenses of the surety in gathering and preparing the .cotton for market after its release should be deducted from its proceeds chargeable to him.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Gunby 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dobson-v-thompson-lactapp-1885.