Gasquet v. Dimitry
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST DISTRICT. The plaintiffs obtained an order of seizure against the defendant, on a mortgage. The parties agreed that the property should be sold at six and twelve months credit, and the notes discounted at a rate not exceeding twelve per cent. There were seveaal mortgages posterior to that of plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST DISTRICT. The plaintiffs obtained an order of seizure against the defendant, on a mortgage. The parties agreed that the property should be sold at six and twelve months credit, and the notes discounted at a rate not exceeding twelve per cent. There were seveaal mortgages posterior to that of plaintiffs. The property was sold, and the sheriff has made a return on the execution, by which it appears that the property did not bring more than sufficient, to satisfy the first mortgage. The sheriff is called upon by rule, to release the subsequent mortgages in…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The plaintiffs are appellants from the discharge of a rule which they had obtained on the sheriff of the parish of New-Orleans, to show cause why he did not release the subsequent mortgages on a tract of land, sold on a writ of seizure and sale, at the instance of the first mortgage whose claime had exhausted the net proceeds of the sale. Code of Practice, 708.
The sheriff averred his readiness to do whatever] the court would direct, but thought himself entitled to the opinion of the court, in the premises, under the Code of Practice, 629.
The record shows that the sale had been made with the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ashbey v. AshbeySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1889
- Dimitry v. PollockSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1843
- Conrad v. PrieurSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1843