Summary

Portrait of Stephen Johnson Field Stephen Johnson Field Oglesby v. Attrill — Opinion of the Court

A compromise, by the code of Louisiana, is defined to be 'an agreement between two or more persons, who, for promoting or putting an end to a lawsuit, adjust their differences by mutual consent, in the manner which they agree on, and which any one of them prefers to the hope of gaining balanced by the danger of losing' (art. 3071) ; and has, between the interested parties, a force equal to the authority of a thing adjudged.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Stephen Johnson Field Stephen Johnson Field Oglesby v. Attrill — Opinion of the Court

It settled all claims arising from the assessment, and the alleged fraudulent purposes of the officers in connection with it. Though made directly between the company and the defendants, it protects from further suit those who advised, equally with those who levied, the assessment; participants in whatever wrong was committed, if any there were, as well as principals; abettors as well as doers of it. No allegations of fraud, in addition to those made at the settlement, can prevent the compromise from having effect as a judgment thereon.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Stephen Johnson Field Stephen Johnson Field Oglesby v. Attrill — Opinion of the Court

It cannot be attacked on account of any error in law or any lesion. Art. 3075.
The suits between the defendants and the Crescent City company involved the validity of the assessment which they, on account 'of frauds and machinations of the officers,' sought to enjoin, whilst the company sought to enforce its payment. The compromise concluded embraced the dismissal of the several suits, of those brought against the defendants, and the one brought by them against the company,-the transfer of their stock, and their release from present and future assessments thereon.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature