State ex rel. Bennett v. Judge of the First District Court
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 3d Cir., October 8, 1980 389 So. 2d 1139; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., February 9, 1977 339 So. 2d 942; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., June 29, 1951 53 So. 2d 482; La. Ct. App. 5th Cir., December 8, 1919 3 Pelt. 190
State ex rel. Bennett v. Judge of the First District Court, 1 Mann. Unrep. Cas. 433 (La. 1880).
Opinion text
Manning, C. J. If by the expression “to be allowed to execute his judgment,” the relator means that he should be permitted to realize, through a Ji. fa. or other process, the amount of his judg *434 ment, lie is clearly not entitled to do it. The bank is in liquidation under order of court. Its assets are in the hands of commissioners appointed by the court who are under bond to execute their trust rightly. The law designates how those assets should be administered, and the relator cannot execute his judgment by taking from those assets sufficient to pay it simply because he has a judgment for money against the bank. Writ refused.