Troendle v. DeBouchel
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Sixth District Court for the parish of Orleans. Hightor J. First — That the holder of a mortgage with the non-alienation clause can proceed directly against the property, making the third possessor defendant.] Second — That when a succession is insolvent the demand and notice required "by Act 69 are useless and not necessary, and the holder of mortgage containing the pact can proceed against the property in the hands of the actual owner and possessor via…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Sixth District Court for the parish of Orleans. Hightor J. First — That the holder of a mortgage with the non-alienation clause can proceed directly against the property, making the third possessor defendant.] Second — That when a succession is insolvent the demand and notice required "by Act 69 are useless and not necessary, and the holder of mortgage containing the pact can proceed against the property in the hands of the actual owner and possessor via executiva. Third — That the senior mortgage creditor is not bound or affected by any sale made by writ issued at the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Poché, J.
On the 27th of August, 1866, F. P. Boutté, who owned one undivided third of a piece of property on the corner of Commercial Alley and St. Charles street, in this city, mortgaged the same to secure a note of $1200, which is now held by plaintiff, and on which he has sued out executory process against the mortgaged premises, now in the possession of the defendant.
Subsequently, Boutté acquired another third of the same property, and, in August, 1869, he mortgaged his two-thirds of that property in favor of C. P. Berens.
Boutté died in February,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hite v. CharbonnetSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1939
- Meridian Fertilizer Factory v. CollierSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1939