TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

D'Arensbourg v. Chauvin

Z. D'Arensbourg v. Chauvin & Levois

D'Arensbourg v. Chauvin, 9 La. Ann. 98 (1854)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Louisiana · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 15, 1854
Judges
Campbell
Citations
9 La. Ann. 98
Headnotes
Lesion is no ground for the rescission, of a judicial sale. The irregularities of a judicial sale are cured by monition. C. 0. 1863 — 25T2.
Summary
APPEAL from the first District Court of New Orleans, Lw'ue, J.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Campbell

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Campbell, J.

This suit was instituted for the recovery of a plantation, slaves and movables, purchased by defendants, at a Sheriff’s sale made in January 18J3, under an order of seizure and sale issued at the suit of the Union Bank of Louisiana against the present plaintiffs.

Alleging lesion and certain irregularities in the Sheriff’s sale, they pray that it be annulled and that they be restored to the possession of the property. They claim also the revenues of the plantation, amounting, as is alleged, to $20,000 annually.

In an amended petition, $2,000 is claimed as the value of sugar cane, cut down before the seizure and not included in the sale, but taken possession of by defendants.

The defendant claims title by virtue of the sale set forth by petitioners and open and peaceable possession under it. They further urge the plea of res judicata, and a judgment homologating said sale, rendered on a writ of monition. To the demand for movable property, or its value, the prescription of three years is pleaded.

We have not deemed it necessary to examine the plea of res judicata or prescription, the plaintiffs having wholly failed to establish their demand on the merits.

Lesion is no ground for the rescission of a judicial sale; and the proceedings under the writ of monition cured all the irregularities of the sale, if any existed. C. C. 1863, 2572. Act of 10th March, 1834, B. & O. Digest, p. 585.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed, with costs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1962: 119622026peak 1962 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Tucker v. New Orleans Laundries, Inc.145 So. 2d 365 (La. Ct. App. 1962)

Most recent

  1. Tucker v. New Orleans Laundries, Inc.145 So. 2d 365 (La. Ct. App. 1962)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list