Richardson v. Dinkgrave

26 La. Ann. 632
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided July 15, 1874·No. No. 476·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

Morgan, J.

The Ingleside plantation was seized in the suit of Pargoud v. Richardson on the fourteenth February, 1873. Mrs. Richardson injoined the sale. The injunction' was dissolved, and on the seventh February, 1874, it was sold and Pargoud became the purchaser.

The seizure in the suit of Pargoud v. Richardson was not released; neither did Mrs. Richardson leave the plantation. The plantation is situated within a short distance of the residence of the sheriff and Pargoud. She cultivated the land and made thereon a crop of cotton and corn with her own means, except three hundred dollars, which the sheriff paid to the hands and which were returned to him.

After she had removed some of the cotton she was injoined from taking anything more off the place.

The injunction was properly dissolved. It is impossible, under the circumstances, for Pargoud and Dinkgrave not to have known that she was cultivating the plantation. We think there is neither law nor justice in depriving her of what she made.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Richardson v. Dinkgrave, 26 La. Ann. 632 (La. 1874).

26 La. Ann. 632 (Richardson v. Dinkgrave) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Vosburg v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans
172 So. 567 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1937)
Federal Land Bank of New Orleans v. Carpenter
164 So. 487 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1935)