Meyer v. Moss
Citations
- 110 La. 132
- 34 So. 332
- 1902 La. LEXIS 188
Syllabus
<p>PLEDGE — EVIDENCE — REVOCATORY ACTION — VENUE — PRESCRIPTION — INTERRUPTION — INTERVENTION — RIGHTS OP SUBPLEDGEE— RES JUDICATA — ACTION BY WIPE — ESTOPPEL.</p> <p>1. On the issues whether there was an indebtedness, and whether the delivery of certain mortgage notes was by way of pledge to secure the said indebtedness or by way of an accommodation lending, held, that a contemporaneous written promise to deliver the notes as collateral is very strong corroborative evidence of there having been a debt, and of the delivery having been by way of pledge.</p> <p>2. The revocatory action to set aside a pledge of mortgage notes may be brought in the court within whose jurisdiction the pledgor and the mortgaged property are found, though the pledgee resides in another state, and keeps the notes in such other state.</p> <p>3. The prescription of such revocatory action is one year, and is not suspended by the principle of “Contra non valentem agere non currit prsescriptio.”</p> <p>4. When after one year the pledgee of mortgage notes brings suit to enforce payment, and a crédito)- of the pledgor institutes the revocatory action by means of an intervention in the suit, and the prescription of one year is pleaded against the revocatory action so instituted, such prescription cannot be obviated by the invocation of the principle, “Quse temporalia sunt ad agendum perpetua sunt ad excipiendum.” The pledgee has been in possession of the object pledged, and the intervener and his debtor, the pledgor, have been out of posses■sion, and the principle quse temporalia can be invoked only by the party in possession as against the party out of possession.</p> <p>5. Besides, the term of one year fixed by law within which the revocatory action may be brought is not a prescription, properly speaking, but is a condition attached to and controlling the grant of the action; and the course of such term is not interrupted or suspended by the causes which suspend or interrupt ordinary prescription
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- further defining the abstract idea as “identifying” atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter “by looking at the variability in time between heartbeats and taking into account ventricular beats”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: 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.