
    No. 5576.
    New Orleans, Mobile and Chattanooga Railroad Company v. T. S. Dugan.
    The defense of the surety on an appeal bond furnished by the plaintiffs, on tho ground that the necessary proceedings were not had against tho principals, can not be sustained, two executions having been issued without effect, and the United States Circuit Court having specially enjoined the execution of any writ against the plaintiffs.
    APPEAL from the Fourth Judicial District Court, parish of St. Charles. Flagg, J.
    J. L>. Augustin, for William Harris, surety on appeal bond, and appellant. Legendre & Foehé, for defendant and. appellee.
   Howell, J.

William Harris has appealed from a judgment against him for $1000, as surety on an appeal bond furnished by the plaintiffs.' His defense is that the necessary proceedings were not had against the principals. The evidence shows that two executions were issued without effect, one in New Orleans and the other in St. Charles. It is shown that the United States Circuit Court had possession of the property of the plaintiffs, and specially enjoined the execution of any writ against them. This brings the ease within the doctrine in Alley v. Hawthorn, 1 An. 123, and Lepretre v. Barthet, 25 An. 124. It differs materially from the circumstances in the case of Saux et al. v. Betz, just deoided.

Judgment affirmed.

Rehearing refused.  