City of New Orleans v. Gurley

Decision Date25 May 1893
Docket Number12,085.
Citation56 F. 376
PartiesCITY OF NEW ORLEANS v. GURLEY.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana

E. A O'Sullivan, City Atty., and Henry Renshaw, Asst. City Atty., for the city of New Orleans.

Richard De Gray, for J. W. Gurley, receiver.

BILLINGS District Judge.

This cause is submitted for final decree on the bill, answer exhibits, and depositions. It grows out of the drainage system for the city of New Orleans. In the 50's the legislature of Louisiana formed a drainage system. A tax was levied once for all upon all the property affected by the drainage system, and commissioners were appointed. Subsequently these commissioners were changed, but the matters connected with the drainage remained in the hands of the drainage commissioners down to the year 1871, when the legislature, by Act No. 30 of the Acts of 1871, p. 75, transferred the whole matter of the conduct of the drainage, its appliances, and the management of the funds connected therewith, to the city of New Orleans.

The question that is presented here comes up in this way: A receiver has been appointed for the creditors of the drainage fund. The city of New Orleans has transferred to that receiver all the property it received from the drainage commissioners. Among the things transferred to the city was the drainage machine known as the 'Dublin Street Drainage Machine,' with the square of ground upon which it is situated, bounded by Fourteenth, Madison, Collipytha, and formerly Adams, now Dublin, streets.

This is a suit by the city to compel from the receiver a reconveyance to itself, as trustee of the drainage matters, of this drainage machine and this square of ground. The decision of the question presented depends upon the construction of the ninth section of the act of 1871, above referred to. That section provides that the drainage commissioners shall transfer to the board of administrators of New Orleans all the moneys, assessments, and claims of drainage in their hands or under their control, all titles, real estate, all books, plans, tableaux, judgments in favor of commissioners the office furniture of said drainage machines, etc. After making provision for the money and the assessments there follows this clause:

'And that all property not money so received shall be held in trust for the payment of said Mississippi and Mexican Gulf Canal Company, and ultimately for the benefit of New Orleans, should the same
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Furnald v. Glenn
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • June 15, 1893

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT