Williams v. Barrow
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE FIFTH FRESIDING. moved to dismiss this case on the ground that the attachment bond was insufficient. The bond executed by the attaching creditor is for five hundred dollars, the sum claimed in the petition.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE FIFTH FRESIDING. moved to dismiss this case on the ground that the attachment bond was insufficient. The bond executed by the attaching creditor is for five hundred dollars, the sum claimed in the petition. It should exceed it by one-half of the sum claimed. 2. The appellant relied on his bill of exceptions to the decision of the judge a quo overruling his motion to dismiss the attachment, by reason of the insufficiency of the attachment bond, and cited Code of Practice, art. 575. 1 Martin’s Digest, 518. Pargoud vs. Ross, 2…
1Opinion of the CourtPorter, J.
This cause commence(j ]3y attachment. The sum claimed- in the petition js five hundred dollars, and the plaintiff on suing out the writ, gave bond to secure the absent debtor in the same sum, viz. five hundred dollars.
A motion was made by the attorneys • appointed to defend the suit, to dismiss the attachment on several grounds. One of them was, that the bond was not given for a sufficient amount. The court overruled the exception.
The correctness of the decision of the judge a quo, depends on the interpretation of the 245th article of the Code of Practice. In the English text the words are, “…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lehman, Stern & Co. v. BroussardSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1893
- Fleitas v. CockremSupreme Court of the United States · 1880