A. Baldwin & Co. v. Mumford

Supreme Court of Louisiana

A. Baldwin & Co. v. Mumford

35 La. Ann. 348

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMarch 15, 1883

DocketNo. 8800

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 35 La. Ann. 348 (A. Baldwin & Co. v. Mumford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

A. Baldwin & Co. v. Mumford, 35 La. Ann. 348 (La. 1883).

Pincite

Opinions

On Motion to Dismiss.

• The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Bermudez, C. J.

The motion to dismiss contains charges that the bond of appeal is deficient.

We deem it unnecessary to inquire into them specially. It is patent from the face and tenor of the bond, which is given for one-half over the amount of the judgment and which expressly binds the surety up to that amount, should the judgment be affirmed, that the appellee, in case of such affirmance and of suit on the bond, would be entitled to recover.

The motion is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

On Motion to Dismiss.

• The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Bermudez, C. J.

The motion to dismiss contains charges that the bond of appeal is deficient.

We deem it unnecessary to inquire into them specially. It is patent from the face and tenor of the bond, which is given for one-half over the amount of the judgment and which expressly binds the surety up to that amount, should the judgment be affirmed, that the appellee, in case of such affirmance and of suit on the bond, would be entitled to recover.

The motion is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 La. Ann. 348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-baldwin-co-v-mumford-la-1883.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack