Donoven & Daley v. Travers & Hermann

Citations

• 122 La. 458
• 47 So. 769
• 1908 La. LEXIS 485

Syllabus

<p>1. Plaintiff's Asserted Title.</p> <p>The plaintiffs, stand on their title as evidencing a sale, and their further contention is that the declaration of the parties to the deed is the guide.</p> <p>2. Evidence (§ 434*) — Parol Evidence Affecting Writings — Sales.</p> <p>The property sold was movable. The declarations in the deed have not the binding effect they have when immovable property is disposed of. ■ As to the last, the declaration in the deed is its guide; not so as to movables. The sale does not of itself rise to an implicar tion of delivery.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Evidence, Cent. Dig. § 2011; Dec. Dig. § 434.*]</p> <p>3. Testimony oe Plaintiff.</p> <p>One of the plaintiffs, representing his firm, testified that the movable property had been sold in satisfaction of their claim as creditors ; in other words, that the price was not cash as declared in the deed.</p> <p>4. Accord and Satisfaction (§■ 13*) —Dation en Paiement — Pledge — Delivery — Necessity.</p> <p>It was not a dation en paiement, for there was no delivery, and for the same reason there was no pledge.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Accord and Satisfaction, Cent. Dig. § 98; Dec. Dig. § 13;* Pledges, Cent. Dig. § 29; Dec. Dig. § 11.*]</p> <p>5. Satisfaction of Claim.</p> <p>The satisfaction of a debt was the consideration.</p> <p>6. No Delivery.</p> <p>It was an attempt to secure a debt as debts are secured under a common-law mortgage on personal property. It could not be thus recovered. There was no delivery, either real or fictitious.</p> <p>7. Writ of Sequestration Dissolved.</p> <p>The writ of sequestration was properly dissolved.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>