Steele v. Mills

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Steele v. Mills

1 Gunby 64

DecidedJuly 1, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Gunby 64 (Steele v. Mills) 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

Steele v. Mills, 1 Gunby 64 (La. Ct. App. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Clinton, J.

Where the sheriff is sued for damages for seizing and disposing of property belonging to a third person, under a ji. fa. issued in a suit wherein a person living in another parish was plaintiff, such plaintiff may be cited at the domicile of the sheriff in a suit to recover damages from the latter on account of his official conduct; the plaintiff in execution is bound by personal warranty to hold the sheriff harmless for acts done under his instructions.

2. Where a merchant furnishes a laborer, working on shares, supplies to enable said laborer to live and work the crop, he has a lien and privilege on the crop, at least, to the extent of the laborer's share therein ; but in a suit to enforce said lieu, the employer or planter should be made a party.

3. Where the acts of the sheriff were not strictly regular, nor warranted by the writ, yet if no injury resulted to plaintiff, no damages will be awarded.

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

Clinton, J.

Where the sheriff is sued for damages for seizing and disposing of property belonging to a third person, under a ji. fa. issued in a suit wherein a person living in another parish was plaintiff, such plaintiff may be cited at the domicile of the sheriff in a suit to recover damages from the latter on account of his official conduct; the plaintiff in execution is bound by personal warranty to hold the sheriff harmless for acts done under his instructions.

2. Where a merchant furnishes a laborer, working on shares, supplies to enable said laborer to live and work the crop, he has a lien and privilege on the crop, at least, to the extent of the laborer's share therein ; but in a suit to enforce said lieu, the employer or planter should be made a party.

3. Where the acts of the sheriff were not strictly regular, nor warranted by the writ, yet if no injury resulted to plaintiff, no damages will be awarded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Gunby 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steele-v-mills-lactapp-1885.