Zander v. Pile
This text of 8 La. 211 (Zander v. Pile) 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
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is an action against the principal and surety in a curator’s bond. The defendants pleaded to the jurisdiction of the District Court. The plea was sustained, and the plaintiff appealed.
We agree with the learned judge of the First District Court, [213]*213that it might be better, that the bonds taken by the Court of Probates from curators, should be acted upon by scire facias in that court, exclusively; being considered as recognizances, or conditional judgments. But a bond is the evidence of a contract, on which a civil action may be instituted, and we know of no law which authorises a court of ordinary jurisdiction to refuse its aid, to’ a suitor in a civil action, the cognizance of which is not exclusively given by law to any particular court, merely because it would be much better that the latter should entertain exclusive jurisdiction of the matter.
This court sees no good reason to change tbe opinion we expressed in the case of Elliott, administrator, vs. White. 5 Louisiana Reports, 322. Monroe vs. McMickin. 8 Martin, N. S., 510.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that tbe judgment of the District Court be annulled, avoided and reversed; tbe plea or exception to the jurisdiction of tbe court be overruled, and that tbe case be remanded for further proceedings according to law; the appellees paying costs in this court.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 La. 211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zander-v-pile-la-1835.