State ex rel. Dowdell v. Allen

Citations

• 105 La. 167

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. It is from the averments of litigants that the judge must decide whether or not the writ of judicial sequestration should issue.</p> <p>2. To wait until the right of title is made clear, and that of possession made certain, would be to render useless and vain that provision of the law authorizing resort to the writ.</p> <p>3. It is held herein that a previous writ of injunction obtained by one of the litigants was not set aside by the judicial sequestration which was issued to meet the requirements of a later phase of the controyersy; it was merely suspended as to one of the objects which he who had obtained it had in view, viz: under shelter of the writ cutting the timber from the land in controversy.</p> <p>4. But if this were a coming in conflict with the injunction, it was a proceeding alike sanctioned by the law and commanded by considerations of justice.</p> <p>5. If a court, on a proper showing made, may order the judicial sequestration of property, it does not become shorn of this power by reason of the fact that it had antecedently on an ex parte showing, made some order in reference to the same property.</p>