Babin v. Pitre

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Babin v. Pitre

555 So. 2d 468, 1990 La. LEXIS 173, 1990 WL 3595

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJanuary 19, 1990

DocketNo. 89-CC-2679

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 555 So. 2d 468 (Babin v. Pitre) 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

Babin v. Pitre, 555 So. 2d 468, 1990 La. LEXIS 173, 1990 WL 3595 (La. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Although the hearing on November 21, 1988 was ordered on a motion for preliminary injunction, the judgment rendered on April 5, 1989 granted a permanent injunction. Nevertheless, it was encumbent upon relator to seek modification of the judgment of permanent injunction by a timely pleading.

Relator’s April 19,1989 motion for a new trial was timely. Because the case was in effect taken under advisement on November 21, 1988, relator was entitled under La.C.C.P. art. 1913 to notice of the signing of the April 5, 1989 judgment. Notice to respondent was mailed by the clerk on April 6, 1989, but notice to relator was by personal service on April 11, 1989. The April 19 motion was filed by relator within seven days, exclusive of holidays, from the day after the service of notice of judgment. La.C.C.P. art. 1974.

Relator’s motion for appeal, filed on June 30, 1989, was also timely as a devolu-tive appeal, having been filed within sixty days of the denial of a new trial in open court. La.C.C.P. art. 2087.

The application is therefore granted. It is ordered that relator be granted a devolu-tive appeal from the April 5, 1989 judgment ordering a permanent injunction.

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

PER CURIAM

Although the hearing on November 21, 1988 was ordered on a motion for preliminary injunction, the judgment rendered on April 5, 1989 granted a permanent injunction. Nevertheless, it was encumbent upon relator to seek modification of the judgment of permanent injunction by a timely pleading.

Relator’s April 19,1989 motion for a new trial was timely. Because the case was in effect taken under advisement on November 21, 1988, relator was entitled under La.C.C.P. art. 1913 to notice of the signing of the April 5, 1989 judgment. Notice to respondent was mailed by the clerk on April 6, 1989, but notice to relator was by personal service on April 11, 1989. The April 19 motion was filed by relator within seven days, exclusive of holidays, from the day after the service of notice of judgment. La.C.C.P. art. 1974.

Relator’s motion for appeal, filed on June 30, 1989, was also timely as a devolu-tive appeal, having been filed within sixty days of the denial of a new trial in open court. La.C.C.P. art. 2087.

The application is therefore granted. It is ordered that relator be granted a devolu-tive appeal from the April 5, 1989 judgment ordering a permanent injunction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

555 So. 2d 468, 1990 La. LEXIS 173, 1990 WL 3595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/babin-v-pitre-la-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack