Dimitry v. Pollock

Simon, J.*

The facts of this case, are fully stated in the report of the first judgment rendered by this court, between the same parties found in 12 La. 296. This controversy originated in a rule upon the Sheriff alone, to show cause why the mortgages subsequent to that of the seizing creditors, Gasquet & Co., should not be released. This court said, that this could not be done in the absence of the subsequent mortgage creditors, and that they ought to be made parties. 6 La. 453.

In June, 1834, Gasquet & Co. took another rule on Dimitry’s mortgagees, to show cause why their mortgages should not…