Jones v. King

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Jones v. King

125 So. 478, 12 La. App. 96, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 784

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedDecember 31, 1929

DocketNo. 3718

StatusPublished

This text of 125 So. 478 (Jones v. King) 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

Jones v. King, 125 So. 478, 12 La. App. 96, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 784 (La. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

REYNOLDS, J.

These cases were consolidated in the lower court, and one judgment, disposing of the issues in both, was signed. The appeal is from an interlocutory decree, rendered after hearing on a restraining order, enjoining the defendant, J. W. King, as sheriff of Caldwell parish, and the defendants, the People’s Bank, and M. L. Sears, as execution creditors of the plaintiff, W. H. Jones, from selling certain described land, seized under writs of fieri facias issued upon judgments obtained by the defendants, respectively, against the plaintiff, on the ground that the seized property was plaintiff’s homestead and exempt from sale.

OPINION

.The issue presented by the record being whether or not the property seized is exempt from sale under article 11 of the Constitution 1921, the Supreme Court and not this court has jurisdiction of the appeal. Constitution 1921, article 7, sec. 10.

It is therefore ordered that the appeal be transferred to the Supreme Court (Act No. 19 of 1912), and that the record on appeal be lodged in that court within 30 days after this judgment shall have become final.

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

REYNOLDS, J.

These cases were consolidated in the lower court, and one judgment, disposing of the issues in both, was signed. The appeal is from an interlocutory decree, rendered after hearing on a restraining order, enjoining the defendant, J. W. King, as sheriff of Caldwell parish, and the defendants, the People’s Bank, and M. L. Sears, as execution creditors of the plaintiff, W. H. Jones, from selling certain described land, seized under writs of fieri facias issued upon judgments obtained by the defendants, respectively, against the plaintiff, on the ground that the seized property was plaintiff’s homestead and exempt from sale.

OPINION

.The issue presented by the record being whether or not the property seized is exempt from sale under article 11 of the Constitution 1921, the Supreme Court and not this court has jurisdiction of the appeal. Constitution 1921, article 7, sec. 10.

It is therefore ordered that the appeal be transferred to the Supreme Court (Act No. 19 of 1912), and that the record on appeal be lodged in that court within 30 days after this judgment shall have become final.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 So. 478, 12 La. App. 96, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-king-lactapp-1929.