Zeta Land Co. v. Lewis

147 So. 914, 177 La. 117, 1933 La. LEXIS 1670
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedMarch 27, 1933
DocketNo. 31988.
StatusPublished

This text of 147 So. 914 (Zeta Land Co. v. Lewis) 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
Zeta Land Co. v. Lewis, 147 So. 914, 177 La. 117, 1933 La. LEXIS 1670 (La. 1933).

Opinion

ST. PAUL, Justice.

Plaintiff, as the holder of certain notes secured by mortgage, sued out executory process, and thereunder seized the mortgaged property. Thereupon George Sladovich, Jr., intervened herein, claiming the property seized as belonging to him by virtue of certain tax sales, and prayed for an injunction restraining the sale; as he had a right to do. C. P. art. 298, No. 7.

He also included in his petition a demand for rents, damages, and fines.; which demand is, of course, utterly untenable.

The trial judge refused to issue an injunction without bond, and the intervener either could not or did not furnish bond. Accordingly, no injunction issued, and the sheriff proceeded to sell the property, and the same was bought in by plaintiff.

Whereupon intervener filed a supplemental petition praying that the sale be set aside and annulled.

To this petition the plaintiff (defendant in injunction) filed an exception of no cause of action which exception was sustained by the trial judge; and the intervener appeals.

We think the trial judge erred. The sale of a thing belonging to another person is null, R. C. C. art. 2452, and manifestly the owner of the property sold has an interest and a *119 right of action to have the nullity of the sale declared.

Of course the petition shows no cause of action as to the untenable demand above mentioned, and the only matter to be considered is whether the intervener has a valid tax title to the property. If he has, the sale should be annulled; if he has not, his suit .should be dismissed.. That is the sole issue properly before the court; and the inquiry should be restricted solely to that issue.

Decree.

■ Por the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is reversed, and it is now ordered that the case 'be remanded to the lower court to be there proceeded with according to law.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
147 So. 914, 177 La. 117, 1933 La. LEXIS 1670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zeta-land-co-v-lewis-la-1933.