Hyde v. Jenkins
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPLICATION FOR A MANDAMUS. In the case of Hyde & Goodrich vs. Jenkins, pending in the District Court of the first district, the plaintiffs moved the Suprem Court for a rule upon the judge a quo, to show cause why a mandmus should not issue, commanding bim to grant the plaintiffs an order of appeal.
Read the full summary
APPLICATION FOR A MANDAMUS. In the case of Hyde & Goodrich vs. Jenkins, pending in the District Court of the first district, the plaintiffs moved the Suprem Court for a rule upon the judge a quo, to show cause why a mandmus should not issue, commanding bim to grant the plaintiffs an order of appeal. The counsel of the plaintiffs made affidavit, that a motion was made in this cause by the Deputy Attorney General, on whose suggestion it was ordered that plaintiffs show cause, why certain goods belonging to defendant, sequestered by the plaintiffs, and deposited with the clerk of the court,…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
On a rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue to command the judge to allow an appeal from certain interlocutory orders lately made by him in the case of Hyde et al. vs. Jenkins, as prayed by the plaintiffs, he showed the following causes:
I. The plaintiffs had arrested the defendant on a charge of his having stolen property of theirs in the city of New York, and had obtained a writ of sequestration for a watch, alleged to be part of said stolen property, as well as an attachment. The mayor of New-Orleans, in whose office the watch, as well as a number of gold coins, found in the…
2Cited by15 opinions
- State ex rel. Lasserre v. MichelSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1901
- Prieto v. St. Alphonsus Convent of MercySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1900
- Pittman v. LillySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1941
- State ex rel. Billington v. Sacred Heart Orphan AsylumSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1923
- Park v. PorterSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1842
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.