Skip to main content
· 6/15/1900

Rabb v. Pillot

Citations

  • 52 La. Ann. 1534

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. One who remains silent, while bis property is sold in another State, will not be estopped from disputing a title so acquired, if -the adjudicatee is not an innocent third person, but is one who is seeking an undue advantage, in disregard of an instrument in writing signed by him acknowledging the property as belonging to the one against whom he claims an estoppel. Plaintiff’s silence, under the eircumstdnces, did not have the effect of’eon- ■ cealing any act or of abandoning his title of which defendant was fully aware, as he, defendant, had, in effect, acknowledged this title by deed.</p> <p>2. The testimony of plaintiff’s witnesses is contradicted by that of defendant’s witnesses, and, as a result, defendant’s title is not sustained. This defendant having withdrawn a prior suit and having entered inro an agreement to share the winnings of the races of the horse claimed, the court holds that he could not acquire title by having the horse sold as belonging to another than plaintiff, with whom defendant had entered into an agreement regarding the winnings, and, in effect, had admitted him, plaintiff, to be the owner.</p> <p>3. An amount is allowed as rental for tlie use of the horse while in defendant’s possession.</p> <p>4. The fee of plaintiff’s attorney is not allowed.</p>

Judges: Breaux

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.