First National Bank v. Fort Wayne Artificial Ice Co.

Citations

• 105 La. 133

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. A third opponent, claiming property under seizure, has no standing to question the regularity of the proceedings, unless he charges fraud or collusion to his prejudice. He is, otherwise, confined to the establishment of his title to the property claimed by him.</p> <p>2. Where a defendant in attachment files a general denial and makes no attack, by pleading, upon the attachment, and no motion to dissolve, and the transcript of appeal fails to show what objections were urged with reference to the issuance of the writ, or when they were urged, or by whom, this court is not at liberty, on the appeal, to review such questions, presented orally or by brief.</p> <p>3. Whilst it is true that quoad the vendor and vendee, immovable property may pass beyond the control of the former, by reason of an unrecorded sale, the proposition does not hold good as to third persons, who are creditors of the vendor, and the property remains subject to seizure by them until the sale is recorded.</p> <p>4. In such a case, the courts will take notice of the fractions of a day, and a recorded seizure will take precedence of a subsequently recorded sale, if the difference in time can be ascertained by proof.</p> <p>5. Where a third opponent claims the ownership of immovable property, which has been seized by the sheriff in a suit against his vendor, the burden of proof is upon him to show not only that the property was sold to him, but that the sale was recorded, before the seizure.</p> <p>On Reheamng.</p> <p>Plaintiff’s seizure, under writ of attachment, having been made prior to the registry of the conveyance under which the intervenor claims, cannot be defeated by the latter.</p>