Fritz Jahncke, Inc. v. Fidelity Deposit Co. of Maryland
This text of 135 So. 32 (Fritz Jahncke, Inc. v. Fidelity Deposit Co. of Maryland) 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.
Opinions
The appeal was moved for and obtained by Emery Norton, Inc., which, as its name indicates, is a corporation.
In the appeal bond given, the appellant is described in the first part as Emery Norton, and in the latter part as Emery Norton, Inc., and in the bond the judgment appealed from is described as one rendered against Emery Norton, Inc., whereas the remainder of the record makes it clear that the judgment was rendered against Emery Norton. *Page 706
Appellee has moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that Emery Norton, Inc., was, at no time, a party to this litigation, and has no appealable interest in it, Emery Norton being the parties cast, who are interested in the litigation, but who have not appealed.
The motion to dismiss should be denied. It is apparent that the error amounts only to a confusion in the use of the name of Emery Norton, the real appellants, which is not misleading. In these circumstances the appeal should not be dismissed.
The motion to dismiss is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
135 So. 32, 172 La. 704, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fritz-jahncke-inc-v-fidelity-deposit-co-of-maryland-la-1931.