First Nat. Bank v. Hebert

This is the third chapter of this litigation, the two former chapters thereof having been written under the same title in 162 La. 703, 111 So. 66, and 163 La. 378, 111 So. 792.

I

In the second opinion herein handed down (163 La. 378, 111 So. 792) we stated the gist of the controversy as follows:

“(I) Relator’s (defendant’s) property was seized by the sheriff, and sold under executory process (foreclosure proceedings). The property was bid in by the bank, and sold by it to one Dartez. When the bank and Dartez attempted to take possession of the property, relator filed a suit to annul the sale on…