History
  • No items yet
midpage
Prewitt v. Carmichael
2 La. Ann. 943
La.
1847
Check Treatment

The judgment of the court was pronounced by

Etjstis, C. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment dissolving an attachment, on the ground that an attachment will not lie in an action for damages for a tort. The plaintiff was shot, and maimed in the knee, by the defendant, and his action is brought for expenses incurred for medical and surgical services, and loss of time during his confinement. The case is accompanied with every species of aggravation, and the damage sustained is definitely stated, sworn to, and proved.

We have sought with much care for a precedent in which the plaintiff’s action could be sustained, but without success. The practice, and the understanding of the profession generally, we believe, has been uniform against the validity of attachments in cases of tort. The subject has been recently thoroughly examined, and, under a full review of our legislation in reference to attachments, the evident intimation of the court was against the validity of attachments in ac'tions for damages in cases of tort. See the case of Irish v. Wright, 12 Rob. 570.

Judgment ajirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Prewitt v. Carmichael
Court Name: Supreme Court of Louisiana
Date Published: Oct 15, 1847
Citation: 2 La. Ann. 943
Court Abbreviation: La.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.