Opinion

Martin v. Blanchin

  • 16 La. Ann. 237
Court
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Filed
Apr 15, 1861
Status
Published
Author
Buchanan
On the bench
Buchanan
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Same Case. — On an Application eor a Re-hearing.

Buchanan, J.

Plaintifis ask for a re-hearing, upon the authority of three decisions, not cited in argument before judgment.

It is contended by counsel that our decision is inconsistent with two cases decided by our predecessors, Brown v. Union Insurance Company, 3 An. 177, and Starke v. Burke, Watt & Co., 5 An. 740; also with the case of Pratt v. McHatton, 11th An. 260, decided by the present Bench.

Brown v. The Union Insurance Company and Starke v. Burke, Watt & Co. were cases of insolvent corporations, and the appointments were made by the court, ex necessitate, in the absence of parties able to appoint a liquidator or Receiver.

In Pratt v. McHatton, no objection seems to have been made to the appointment of a Receiver, until the case was in the Supreme Court on appeal, and the objects of the appointment had been accomplished by the sale of the assets of the partnership.

These cases are manifestly inapplicable to the pi’esent issue.

Re-hearing refused.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.