Burke & Co. v. Edey

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Burke & Co. v. Edey

21 La. Ann. 749

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedDecember 15, 1869

DocketNo. 1783

StatusPublished

This text of 21 La. Ann. 749 (Burke & Co. v. Edey) 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

Burke & Co. v. Edey, 21 La. Ann. 749 (La. 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

IIowe, J.

William Golding has appealed from a judgment rendered against him as indorser of a promissory note. Upon the trial his counsel objected to certain testimony, hut reserved no hill of exceptions to the ruling of the Judge admitting the same. The objection cannot ho noticed. Succession of Prevost, 4 An. 347; West v. his creditors, 4 An. 447; Gray v. Thomas, 18 An. 412.

The appeal seems to he frivolous, and- to have been taken for delay meiely.

It is therefore ordered, that the judgment appealed from he affirmed with costs, and with ten per cent, damages for frivolous appeal.

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

IIowe, J.

William Golding has appealed from a judgment rendered against him as indorser of a promissory note. Upon the trial his counsel objected to certain testimony, hut reserved no hill of exceptions to the ruling of the Judge admitting the same. The objection cannot ho noticed. Succession of Prevost, 4 An. 347; West v. his creditors, 4 An. 447; Gray v. Thomas, 18 An. 412.

The appeal seems to he frivolous, and- to have been taken for delay meiely.

It is therefore ordered, that the judgment appealed from he affirmed with costs, and with ten per cent, damages for frivolous appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 La. Ann. 749, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burke-co-v-edey-la-1869.