Hays v. Muir

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Hays v. Muir

1 Gunby 19

DecidedJuly 1, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Gunby 19 (Hays v. Muir) 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

Hays v. Muir, 1 Gunby 19 (La. Ct. App. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Mayo, J.

Where defendant in executory process has taken an appeal which has been adversely decided, she can afterwards enjoin the writ on any grounds not passed upon on the appeal.

2. A sale of property by the sheriff, for less than the amount of the special mortgages anterior to that of. the seizing creditor, is an absolute nullity, so far as it affects the rights of such anterior mortgagees.

3. But if the party holding the anterior mortgage file a third opposition, claiming the proceeds of the sheriff’s sale, and after the sale is made prosecute his opposition to judgment, which is rendered in his favor, ordering the proceeds to be paid over to him, he cannot refuse to receive the same and attack the sale as null, because the price at which the property was sold was less than the amount of his mortgage. He is estopped by the principle, that one cannot claim the proceeds of a sheriff’s sale and afterwards attack the sale as a nullity. 31 An. 103; 29 An. 275; 4 An. 416; 5 An. 18; 23 An. 765; 26 An. 630.

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

Mayo, J.

Where defendant in executory process has taken an appeal which has been adversely decided, she can afterwards enjoin the writ on any grounds not passed upon on the appeal.

2. A sale of property by the sheriff, for less than the amount of the special mortgages anterior to that of. the seizing creditor, is an absolute nullity, so far as it affects the rights of such anterior mortgagees.

3. But if the party holding the anterior mortgage file a third opposition, claiming the proceeds of the sheriff’s sale, and after the sale is made prosecute his opposition to judgment, which is rendered in his favor, ordering the proceeds to be paid over to him, he cannot refuse to receive the same and attack the sale as null, because the price at which the property was sold was less than the amount of his mortgage. He is estopped by the principle, that one cannot claim the proceeds of a sheriff’s sale and afterwards attack the sale as a nullity. 31 An. 103; 29 An. 275; 4 An. 416; 5 An. 18; 23 An. 765; 26 An. 630.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Gunby 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hays-v-muir-lactapp-1885.