Pailhes v. Roux
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Eastern Dist. APTEAL ¡FROM TIIE COURT OP THE JTRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT, JUDGE BUCHANAN PRESIDING. This is an action on a promissory note, commenced by attachment. The defendant came forward, and bonded the property attached. A few days afterwards he took a rule on the plaintiff to show cause why the attachment should not be dissolved, on the ground that the facts set forth in the affidavit were untrue.
Read the full summary
Eastern Dist. APTEAL ¡FROM TIIE COURT OP THE JTRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT, JUDGE BUCHANAN PRESIDING. This is an action on a promissory note, commenced by attachment. The defendant came forward, and bonded the property attached. A few days afterwards he took a rule on the plaintiff to show cause why the attachment should not be dissolved, on the ground that the facts set forth in the affidavit were untrue. On the trial of the rule, the defendant offered evidence to show that the allegations, that he was about to leave the state, were unfounded, and not true, and that the attachment ought to be…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The plaintiff is appellant from a judgment which sets aside an attachment he had obtained against the property of the defendant. "
His counsel has first drawn our attention to a bill of exceptions, taken to the admission of testimony to disprove the facts on which the attachment was obtained, on the ground that the defendant having bonded the property attached, could not demand that the attachment be- set aside, because in the opinion of the plaintiff’s counsel it was already done.
The defendant gave bond with a view to be restored to ° the possession of the property attached, in pursuance of…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Quine v. MayesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1842
- Myers v. PerrySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1846
- Ribundo v. KempLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1930
- Avet v. AlboSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1869
- Bates, Reed & Cooley v. Killian & Bros.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1882
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.