Hunter v. Smith

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Hunter v. Smith

5 Mart. (N.S.) 164

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided October 15, 1826·Published

Opinion

Martin, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. This case was remanded for a new trial, in September 1824, vol. 3, 109. The plaintiff, on the return of it, prayed leave to dismiss his suit, which was granted, and the defendant appealed.

The plaintiff’s right to pray a discontinuance of his suit was recognised by this court in the case of Petit vs. Gillet. 5 Martin 20. And we have heard nothing that militates against it. The court may itself order a dismissal. Part 3, 22 3, 22, 9.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and deceeed, that the judgment of the district court be affirmed with costs.

[165]*165West'n Dis'ct October, 1826 Thomas for the plaintiff, Baldwin for the defendant.

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

Martin, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. This case was remanded for a new trial, in September 1824, vol. 3, 109. The plaintiff, on the return of it, prayed leave to dismiss his suit, which was granted, and the defendant appealed.

The plaintiff’s right to pray a discontinuance of his suit was recognised by this court in the case of Petit vs. Gillet. 5 Martin 20. And we have heard nothing that militates against it. The court may itself order a dismissal. Part 3, 22 3, 22, 9.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and deceeed, that the judgment of the district court be affirmed with costs.

[165]*165West'n Dis'ct October, 1826 Thomas for the plaintiff, Baldwin for the defendant.

Hunter v. Smith, 5 Mart. (N.S.) 164 (La. 1826).

Pincite

5 Mart. (N.S.) 164 (Hunter v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related