Bourgh v. Hester

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Bourgh v. Hester

1 La. App. 152, 1924 La. App. LEXIS 64

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 17, 1924

DocketNo. 9713

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1 La. App. 152 (Bourgh v. Hester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bourgh v. Hester, 1 La. App. 152, 1924 La. App. LEXIS 64 (La. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

WESTERFIELD, J.

Plaintiff and appellee move -to dismiss this appeal upon the ground that the transcript was filed too late.

The original return day, June 23, 1924, was upon timely application extended to July 23, 1924. The transcript was not filed until July 26, 1924, three days thereafter. No days of grace are allowable upon an extended return day. Sampite vs. Desloucha, 135 La. 330.

Appellant contends that where, as in this case, the appeal is made returnable to a day not in term time, the transcript may be filed on the first day of the next ensuing term, citing Hoke vs. Lee, 104 La. 124, 28 South. 922. The law. has been changed since Hoke vs. Lee and transcripts must now be filed and appeals lodged in this court within three days of the original return day, or on or before the date of extended return day, which cannot be less than fifteen or more than sixty days from the-, date of the order granting the appeal, whether the return [153]*153day be in term time or vacation. We can add nothing to what we said on this subject in Laiche et al. vs. Martin, XI Orl. App. 96, affirmed in Laiche vs. Martin, 135 La. 798, 66 So. 226.

For the reasons assigned, the appeal herein taken is dismissed.

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

WESTERFIELD, J.

Plaintiff and appellee move -to dismiss this appeal upon the ground that the transcript was filed too late.

The original return day, June 23, 1924, was upon timely application extended to July 23, 1924. The transcript was not filed until July 26, 1924, three days thereafter. No days of grace are allowable upon an extended return day. Sampite vs. Desloucha, 135 La. 330.

Appellant contends that where, as in this case, the appeal is made returnable to a day not in term time, the transcript may be filed on the first day of the next ensuing term, citing Hoke vs. Lee, 104 La. 124, 28 South. 922. The law. has been changed since Hoke vs. Lee and transcripts must now be filed and appeals lodged in this court within three days of the original return day, or on or before the date of extended return day, which cannot be less than fifteen or more than sixty days from the-, date of the order granting the appeal, whether the return [153]*153day be in term time or vacation. We can add nothing to what we said on this subject in Laiche et al. vs. Martin, XI Orl. App. 96, affirmed in Laiche vs. Martin, 135 La. 798, 66 So. 226.

For the reasons assigned, the appeal herein taken is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 La. App. 152, 1924 La. App. LEXIS 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bourgh-v-hester-lactapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack