Hozey v. M'Dougall
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST DISTRICT, JUDGE BUCHANAN PRESIDING. In this case, Andrew S. Barker became the purchaser of a lot of ground sold under execution, in the suit of James Erwin vs. John Wilcox, and after paying Erwin’s debt, there remained a balance of two thousand and sixty-seven dollars and thirteen cents, which was claimed by trustees of certain creditors of Wilcox, under a conventional mortgage, to come in next after that under which the property was sold.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST DISTRICT, JUDGE BUCHANAN PRESIDING. In this case, Andrew S. Barker became the purchaser of a lot of ground sold under execution, in the suit of James Erwin vs. John Wilcox, and after paying Erwin’s debt, there remained a balance of two thousand and sixty-seven dollars and thirteen cents, which was claimed by trustees of certain creditors of Wilcox, under a conventional mortgage, to come in next after that under which the property was sold. Barker sold the premises to Madame Hester Matilda M£Dougall, for four thousand two hundred dollars; two thousand dollars…
1Opinion of the CourtMorphy, J.
The plaintiff having sued out an order of seizure and sale, on a note of two thousand two hundred dollars, placed in the hands of- his predecessor, F. Buisson, for certain purposes set forth in an authentic deed of transfer and subrogation, executed to him by Andrew S. Barker. A rule was taken by defendant, for him to show cause why the said order should not be set aside, on the following grounds, to wit:
1. That the plaintiff had no interest in the note upon which the order had issued, and could not maintain any action on it.
2. That said note was the property of John Wilcox, but that the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- De Brueys v. BurnsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1918
- Koch v. GodchauxSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1894