| La. | Feb 15, 1837
delivered the opinion of the court.
The facts which led to the present controversy will appear by reference to the case of Cooley vs. Beauvais, decided by this court last January term. 9 Louisiana Reports, 85.
It appears, in the present case, that Beauvais ordered out an execution against Madame Mourain, to coerce the payment of a sum of five hundred dollars, allowed him by the District Court, as her curator ad hoc, which was levied on a slave belonging to her. She procured from the District Court an injunction to stay proceedings, on the allegation that previous to the issuing of the execution, the sum thus allowed had been paid to the attorney of Beauvais.
The defendant, in the injunction in his answer, admits he was appointed curator ad hoc, and that a sum of,five hundred dollars was allowed him for his trouble and expense in representing the plaintiff; but he denies that any part of the sum had been paid to his attorney, or that he ever authorized any agent or attorney to receive the same. He further alleges, that so far from having done so, the order of the District Court, making him that allowance, had been, on the 18th January, 1836, declared by the Supreme Court null and void, in a suit of T. J. Cooley against him. He therefore prays that the injunction may be dissolved, and that he may have judgment against the plaintiff and her security, jointly and severally, for the sum of five hundred dollars in damages. He further prays that T. J. Cooley may be made a party, and that should it appear that he had received the said sum from Madame Mourain, or her agent, in the name of, or as agent, or in any other character in which he may have assumed to represent the respondent, that judgment may be rendered in his favor against Cooley for that sum, with damages and costs.
The Court refused to issue process of citation to Cooley, and to make him a party, and a bill of exceptions was taken, and the injunction having been made perpetual, the defendant appealed.
We are of opinion the court did not err in overruling that part of the defendant’s answer, by which he sought to make
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed, with costs.