Carter v. Hollingsworth Realty Co.

8 La. App. 67, 1928 La. App. LEXIS 433
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided March 14, 1928·No. No. 3163·Published

Opinion

WEBB, J.

. The defendant appealed from a judgment rendered against it and on rule filed in the trial court to test the sufficiency of the appeal bond, judgment was rendered declaring the bond insufficient and dissolving the appeal, in which ruling the defendant apparently acquiesced, and on motion duly made here to dismiss the appeal for want of bond, the defendant does not make any appearance.

The trial court was vested with jurisdiction to test the sufficiency of the appeal bond (Art. 575, C. P.; Goodrich vs. Bodley, 35 La. Ann. 525; Vredenburg vs. Behan, 32 La. Ann. 477) and the appellant having failed to question the correctness of the ruling, there is no bond, and the appeal must be dismissed. (Huppenbauer vs. Durlin, 23 La. Ann. 739; Baker vs. Shultz, 35 La. Ann. 524).

The motion to dismiss the appeal is therefore sustained.

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

Carter v. Hollingsworth Realty Co., 8 La. App. 67, 1928 La. App. LEXIS 433 (La. Ct. App. 1928).

8 La. App. 67 (Carter v. Hollingsworth Realty Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Huppenbauer v. Durbin
23 La. Ann. 739 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1871)
Vredenburgh v. Behan
32 La. Ann. 475 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1880)
Baker v. Shultz
35 La. Ann. 524 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1883)
Goodrich v. Bodley
35 La. Ann. 525 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1883)