Richardson & Co. v. Gaither

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Richardson & Co. v. Gaither

1 Gunby 90

DecidedJuly 1, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Gunby 90 (Richardson & Co. v. Gaither) 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

Richardson & Co. v. Gaither, 1 Gunby 90 (La. Ct. App. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Mayo, J.

Where a party brings suit against his debtor, and the latter obtains a continuance, but at the same term of court confesses judgment in favor of his brother, on which execution is issued two days after the adjournment of court, and the creditor thereupon files a second suit coupled with an attachment and action to annul the brother’s judgment, held : The second suit cannot be dismissed on the plea of lis pendens and no cause of action.

2. Although, where cause for attachment arises subsequent to plaintiff’s filing an ordinary suit, the attachment may properly be applied for by amended petition in the original suit, there is nothing to prevent his filing a second suit as auxiliary to the first.

3. Such suit cannot be consolidated and tried together with the first.

4. The delay allowed before issuing execution is for the benefit of defendant, to enable him to take a suspensive appeal; 14 An. 288; but the creditor who makes a speedy issuance of execution cannot thereby, obtain any advantage over other creditors.

5. The Appellate Court may reinstate an attachment, and give it full effect, although no suspensive appeal has been taken from the judgment dissolving it.

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

Mayo, J.

Where a party brings suit against his debtor, and the latter obtains a continuance, but at the same term of court confesses judgment in favor of his brother, on which execution is issued two days after the adjournment of court, and the creditor thereupon files a second suit coupled with an attachment and action to annul the brother’s judgment, held : The second suit cannot be dismissed on the plea of lis pendens and no cause of action.

2. Although, where cause for attachment arises subsequent to plaintiff’s filing an ordinary suit, the attachment may properly be applied for by amended petition in the original suit, there is nothing to prevent his filing a second suit as auxiliary to the first.

3. Such suit cannot be consolidated and tried together with the first.

4. The delay allowed before issuing execution is for the benefit of defendant, to enable him to take a suspensive appeal; 14 An. 288; but the creditor who makes a speedy issuance of execution cannot thereby, obtain any advantage over other creditors.

5. The Appellate Court may reinstate an attachment, and give it full effect, although no suspensive appeal has been taken from the judgment dissolving it.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Gunby 90, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-co-v-gaither-lactapp-1885.