Saloy v. Collins

30 La. Ann. 63
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedJanuary 15, 1878
DocketNo. 6753
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 30 La. Ann. 63 (Saloy v. Collins) 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.

Bluebook
Saloy v. Collins, 30 La. Ann. 63 (La. 1878).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Marr, J.

Under a writ of seizure and sale the sheriff of the parish of Orleans advertised and was about to sell the mortgaged property, when Collins, the mortgagor, obtained an injunction, on the ground that, either the judge who granted the order was without jurisdiction or the civil sheriff of the parish of Orleans was without power or authority to execute the writ.

Saloy, the seizing creditor, moved the court to set aside and dissolve the injunction, with damages and costs, on the grounds:

First — That the injunction bond was irregular, and insufficient.

Second — That the surety on the bond was not good and solvent.

Third — That the petition for injunction, on its face, discloses no cause of action, and no right to the relief prayed for.

The judge gave his reasons at length, and signed them, for his judgment; and on the same day, rendered judgment dissolving the injunction, with twenty per cent damages, and costs; and Collins appealed.

The judgment which we find in the record is copied from the minutes. It is not signed, nor is there any evidence or indication in the record that it was actually signed.

The sole purpose of the injunction suit was to arrest the proceedings under the writ of seizure and sale, on the grounds stated in the [64]*64petition. The judgment dissolving the injunction, with damages and costs, decided all the points in controversy between the parties; and it was, therefore, a final judgment; C. P. article 539 ; which the law required the judge to sign. C. P. art. 546.

This court has jurisdiction of appeals from final judgments, C. P., art. 565, and of such interlocutory judgments as may cause irreparable injury. Art.-566. But an interlocutory judgment, which need not be signed, is merely a decision on preliminary matters, which still leaves the merits to be disposed of by the definitive judgment. C. P. art. 538.

No appeal lies from a definitive judgment until it is signed. The appeal, therefore, in this ease was premature, and this court is without jurisdiction to entertain it, or to make any further inquiry touching it.

The appeal therefore is dismissed with costs. .

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

Related

Davis v. Clemmons
205 So. 2d 143 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1967)
State ex rel. Poche v. Police Jury of St. James Parish
109 So. 2d 83 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1959)
Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Callicott
83 So. 2d 671 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1955)
Succession of Savoie
196 So. 923 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1940)
Mossler Acceptance Co. v. Moliere
181 So. 228 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1938)
Jackson v. Swift & Co.
151 So. 816 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1934)
Depetro v. Mitchner
134 So. 273 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1931)
State v. Flattmann
135 So. 3 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1931)
H. C. Jones & Sons v. Wascom
132 So. 803 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1931)
Carroll v. Powell
8 La. App. 536 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1928)
River & Rails Terminals, Inc. v. Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co.
103 So. 331 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1925)
Franke v. Shaw
97 So. 793 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1923)
State v. Hataway
96 So. 556 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1923)
James v. St. Charles Hotel Co.
83 So. 222 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1919)
Steele v. State
19 Tex. Ct. App. 425 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
30 La. Ann. 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saloy-v-collins-la-1878.