Where streets were opened in New Orleans, a sum of money, as
indemnity, was allowed to G, as being the supposed owner of the
property condemned.
D claimed to be the owner of the property, and brought a suit
against the city for the money, in which suit G was cited for the
purpose of having the question decided to whom the property
belonged, and judgment was rendered against the city in favor of
D.
Page 63 U. S. 142
Afterwards G brought a suit in the circuit court of the United
States, and the city pleaded the former judgment in bar.
But as these facts were not given in evidence upon the trial,
nor did the judge make any statement of facts found by him, the
record presents only the judgment against the city in favor of G,
and there is no ground of error upon which this Court can reverse
the judgment.
The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the
Court.
Page 63 U. S. 143
MR. JUSTICE CATRON delivered the opinion of the Court.
The City of New Orleans instituted proceedings by suit in a city
court pursuant to a statute of Louisiana for opening two streets in
the city and appropriating the private property requisite for that
purpose, and on the tableau of assessment, certain squares of
ground were put down as belonging to Mrs. Gaines, and the damages
done to owner fixed at $2,363.
The assessment was decreed to Mrs. Gaines by the court where the
proceeding was had, and she brought suit on this judgment against
the city in the United States circuit court.
The defendant, the city, by its answer, admitted the proceeding,
and the damages assessed on the property described in the petition,
but in avoidance of the demand averred that a suit had been brought
by one Durell against the city, claiming that he was the true owner
of the property through which the streets run, and which the
commissioners of assessment had supposed to be owned by Mrs.
Gaines, and demanding payment to him of the damages claimed by her;
that in the suit so brought by Durell, Mrs. Gaines had been
personally cited as a party, at the instance of the city, for the
purpose of having the question decided between her and Durell as to
the ownership of the property and as to their respective claims on
the city for the sum awarded, and that in said suit judgment was
rendered determining the question in favor of Durell, and this
judgment is pleaded in bar of the present suit.
Various documents were exhibited with the answer and filed in
the circuit court on behalf of the city, including a record of the
suit by Durell against the city and the recovery
Page 63 U. S. 144
of the damages for extending the streets, but nothing appears in
the record showing that these documents were given in evidence on
the trial, nor did the judge before whom the cause was heard make
any statement of the facts found by him, as the usual practice is,
where the circuit court in Louisiana tries issues of fact without
the intervention of a jury.
The cause as presented to us simply shows a judgment in Mrs.
Gaines' favor, with regular pleadings to warrant it, and beyond
this contains nothing that this Court can notice as a court of
error.
It is ordered that the judgment below be affirmed.
