Kimball v. Plant
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT, FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This case was before the court at the last May terra, on the appeal of the intervenors. See Ante, 10. On the return of the case to the Parish Court, the plaintiffs, being satisfied with their judgment against the defendants, took a rule on Messrs.
Read the full summary
Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT, FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This case was before the court at the last May terra, on the appeal of the intervenors. See Ante, 10. On the return of the case to the Parish Court, the plaintiffs, being satisfied with their judgment against the defendants, took a rule on Messrs. Chittenden and Bailey, wbo had been cited as garnishees, to show cause why judgment should not be rendered against them separately for amount sufficient to satisfy plaintiff’s judgment against the defendant, or why Bailey should not deliver up the money, bills of…
1Opinion of the CourtMorphy, J.
This case came up last May term, on an appeal from a judgment of the Parish Court, dismissing the intervention of Perkins and Putnam, in this suit. The latter had claimed, under an assignment executed to them in New-York by defendants, certain notes and credits, attached by the plaintiff in the hands of Chittenden and Bailey, the present appellants. The judgment appealed from; was affirmed by this court, on the ground, that a voluntary assignment, made in New-York by a commercial firm established there, and wherein credits in Louisiana áre assigned, cannot defeat an attachment sued out by a…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Frazier v. WilcoxSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1843
- Johnson v. MurphySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1909
- Hazard v. Agricultural Bank of MississippiSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1845
- Halpin v. BarringerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1874
- First Natchez Bank v. MossSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1899
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.