Mechanics & Traders' Insurance v. Gerson
This text of 38 La. Ann. 349 (Mechanics & Traders' Insurance v. Gerson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
This record presents a separate appeal taken, in the-case just decided, from an interlocutory order of the judge revoking an order previously made by him permitting a supplemental petition to be filed.
The object of this supplemental petition was to make Barbara Sauter and her husband parties with the view of recovering judgment against them.
An order refusing or revoking'permission to file a supplemental petition is not ordinarily appealable, Penrice vs. Crothwaite, 11 Mart. 547; Giordano vs. Thomas, 13 La. 315.
No doubt a different rule would apply where the object of the supplemental petition was to join a revocatory action to the principal demand, and for that purpose to make tire third persons concerned parties. Such a right is granted by Art. 1975 and 1972, C. C., and being the only mode by which the revocatory action can be prosecuted before judgment, the right should be protected.
But after careful examination of the supplemental petition, we cannot class it as a revocatory action on the ground either of fraud or simulation. It does not pray for the judgment appropriate to such an action, as stated in Art. 1977, but asks for an independent money judgment against the Sauters.
The matter is of slight consequence, because under the judgment rendered by us in tlie principal case, plaintiff’s remedy, if be is entitled to any, is open in an independent, action, which would be as effective as if the case were remanded.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
38 La. Ann. 349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mechanics-traders-insurance-v-gerson-la-1886.