Hyatt v. Gallier
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the District Court of Jefferson, Ciarle, J. amongst others, _made the following point: That the plea of “failure to reinscribe,” made by defendants, was not sustained by any proof, and the onusprohancli lays on the party making the plea.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the District Court of Jefferson, Ciarle, J. amongst others, _made the following point: That the plea of “failure to reinscribe,” made by defendants, was not sustained by any proof, and the onusprohancli lays on the party making the plea. In support of this ground he referred to decisions in reference to pleas of prescription, which he contended were analogous, viz: Andrews v. Rhodes, 10 R. R. 52. 5 N. S. 341. As to the onus prohandi, he referred to 9 M. R. 48. 6 N. S. 88. Greeuleaf on Evidence, No. 74.
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the court was pronounced by
Rost, J.
This is an hypothecary action, founded upon a judicial mortgage arising from a judgment obtained by William McLean against Charles Byrne in 1840, and transferred to the plain ¿¡If on the 20th of April, 1850. At the time the judgment was rendered, Byrne appeared by the public records as the owner of the three lots, now in possession of the defendants, upon which the mortgage is claimed. Among other pleas, the defendants set up as .a defence the peremption of the mortgage for want of reinscription during more than ten years. The district court…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Murff v. RatcliffLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1932
- Flowers, Inc. v. RauschLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1977
- Friedrich v. Handy Andy Community Stores of Louisiana, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1935
- State Ex. Rel. Pickett v. BullockSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1941