Massie v. Louque
Citations
- 109 La. 769
- 33 So. 764
- 1901 La. LEXIS 580
Syllabus
<p>RIGHT TO APPEAL — NECESSARY PARTIES.</p> <p>1. The vendor of real estate transferred one of the two notes given for the purchase price. At the maturity of the notes he and the transferee instituted separate suits in foreclosure of the notes and of the mortgage stipulated in the act of sale to secure them, and these suits were consolidated. The purchaser was a corporation. It enjoined the foreclosure proceedings, claiming that it had been evicted from part of the property, and was entitled to a diminution of price, and that, as a result of this diminution, the vendor should restore part of the cash portion of the price, and the notes be declared null because of failure of consideration; also that the notes were prescribed. Before the trial the vendor transferred his rights in the suit to his coplaintiff in the executory process. One of the stockholders of the plaintiff in injunction sought to make himself a party to the suit by intervention and third opposition, but, on exception of his being without interest or standing in the suit, he was excluded. From a judgment dismissing the injunction suit this stockholder took an appeal under the provision of our law permitting third persons to appeal; but he failed to make the vendor a party to the appeal. On motion to dismiss the appeals, held: First, that such stockholder was a third person, notwithstanding his unsuccessful attempt to become a party to the suit; secondly, that the vendor, both as defendant in the suit for diminution and as warrantor on the notes, had an interest in maintaining the judgment appealed from, and that the failure to cite him was fatal to the appeal.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that the second prong of Strickland is satisfied in the sentencing context only where the movant has shown that “but for counsel’s ineffectiveness, there is a reasonable probability that the sentence imposed would have been different”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Nicholls, Provosty
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.