
    RIVIERE, f. w. c. vs BOISSIERE.
    Ekstere Dis.
    
      April, 1833.
    APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST DISTRICT.
    A demand to rescind a sale, for lesion, must be supported by strong proof.
    'A demand to iSnd must’ bé strong proof. by
    It is alleged that the defendant, taking advantage of the old age and infirmity of the plaintiff’s ancestor, induced the latter, for three hundred and twenty-four dollars, to sell and give him possession of a lot, in New-Orleans, worth fifteen hundred dollars. The plaintiff prayed to have the property restored, or the balance of its value paid to her.
    The defendant denied the allegations of the petition, averred the price which he paid was a fair one, and that he had become a bona fide owner of the lot. Judgment was rendered for the defendant, and the plaintiff, appealed.
    
      D. Seghers, for appellant.
    Canon, for appellee.
   The opinion of the court, Mathews, J. being absent, was delivered by

Porter, J.

This is an action to set aside a sale of a town lot, on the the ground of lesion. The case turns on the fact whether it existed or not. The judge of the court of the first instance, thought the evidence so doubtful, that he could not annul the contract; and he declared, that in cases of this kind, the evidence should be most clear and satisfactory in support of a plaintiff’s pretensions. A perusal of the testi-mon7’ leaves our minds pretty much in the same situation w^h that of the judge of the first instance; and we fully agree with him in thinking that demands of this kind should be supported by strong proof.

It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed, with costs.  