Carroll v. Bridewell
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 3d Cir., February 14, 1977 339 So. 2d 880; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., May 15, 1973 278 So. 2d 167; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., June 29, 1962 142 So. 2d 814
Carroll v. Bridewell, 27 La. 239 (1875).
Opinion text
Morgan, J., dissenting. The intervenor was the lessor of the plantation. Upon the crop made thereon and the movables used in growing it, she had a privilege superior to the plaintiffs, who furnished the supplies. It is true that the property seized by the plaintiffs was bonded, and that the intervenor went on the bond. Still the bond represents the property, and upon the property her lien and privilege, superior to the plaintiffs’,,is, I think, incontestible. I am, therefore, of opinion that the district judge erred in dismissing the intervention. I therefore dissent from the opinion just pronounced.