Coguenhem v. Himalaya Planting & Mfg. Co.
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Appeal from Twenty-Seventh Judicial District Court, Parish of Assumption; C. C. Weber, Judge ad hoc. Action by Manuel Coguenhem against the Himalaya Planting & Manufacturing Company and others. On intervention and third opposition of the Texas Oil Company and others. From the judgment plaintiff and others appeal.
1Opinion of the Court
Statement of the Case.
O’NIELL, J.
The plaintiff sued on a prom-_ issory note for $2,469.60, drawn by the Himalaya Planting & Manufacturing Company and indorsed by J. Sully Martel. Alleging that the note represented the price of certain seed peas that were necessary and were furnished to cultivate and make a crop on the Himalaya plantation in 1912, and that the claim was therefore secured by a lien on the crops, the plaintiff prayed for and obtained a writ of sequestration, under which the sheriff seized a tank of centrifugal molasses, a tank of second sugar, 33 barrels of sugar, 30 barrels of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- National Bank of Commerce v. SullivanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1906
- Milliken v. RogerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1916
- C. H. Minge & Co. v. BarbreSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1899
- Viguerie v. ViguerieSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1913
- Saloy v. DragonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1885
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Albert Pick & Co. v. Dickinsons, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1923
- Union Truck Terminal, Inc. v. PerlsteinLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1951