Adle v. Anty
Supreme Court of Louisiana
from the District Court of Natchitoches, Campbell, J. In an action against a married woman it is sufficient if the husband and wife be cited. No special order authorizing her to defend the action is necessary, unless the husband be interdicted, or absent, or refuse to assist her.
Read the full summary
from the District Court of Natchitoches, Campbell, J. In an action against a married woman it is sufficient if the husband and wife be cited. No special order authorizing her to defend the action is necessary, unless the husband be interdicted, or absent, or refuse to assist her. Code of Pract., arts. 118,123, 126,129. .Bousquet (Diet, des Obligations) in his annotations on art. 215 of the Code Napoleon, says : “ Quoique les poursuites soient dirigées, tant contre le mari que contre la femme, il ne s’en suit pas que cette derniére puisse ester dans les jugements rendus sur ces poursuites,…
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the court was pronounced by
Rost, J.
The plaintiff instituted an hypothecary action against the defendant, a married woman, and joined her husband in the suit. The defendants having failed to appear, a judgment by default was entered against them. Subsequently the judgment by default was set aside, and Melite Anty alone filed an answer to the merits. Upon that issue the plaintiff went to trial without taking the necessary steps to have the wife authorized to contest the suit, and judgment was rendered in his favor. From this judgment the wife, assisted by her husband, has…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Jefferson v. GammSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Mulling v. JonesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1917
- Holland v. BryanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1921