Hamilton v. Moss

261 So. 2d 667, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 6765
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedApril 19, 1972
DocketNo. 3860
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 261 So. 2d 667 (Hamilton v. Moss) 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
Hamilton v. Moss, 261 So. 2d 667, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 6765 (La. Ct. App. 1972).

Opinion

MILLER, Judge.

A writ of certiorari was granted on February 28, 1972 to review the City Court’s dismissal of an appeal perfected November 26, 1971. The City Court held that the delays for perfecting an appeal commenced on November 2, 1971, the date judgment was rendered, rather than on November 16, 1971, the date judgment was signed. We reverse.

Plaintiff relator appealed the adverse judgment by motion and bond filed November 24, 1971. The order granting the appeal was signed November 26, 1971.

The time for commencement of delay for applying for a new trial in the city court under LSA-C.C.P. Art. 50021 was intended to be the same as in the district court. Consequently the phrase "date of judgment” in the third paragraph of Article 5002 means the date on which the judgment is signed in open court by the judge. C.H.F. Finance Company v. Smith, 244 La. 180, 151 So.2d 364 (1963). See also Wooten v. Central Mutual Insurance Company, 177 So.2d 657 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1965).

The appeal bond was filed and the order of appeal signed within the ten day [669]*669limit set by LSA-C.C.P. Art. 5002. The trial court was divested of jurisdiction no later than November 26, 1971. LSA-C.C. P. Art. 2088. Martin v. Martin, 228 So. 2d 355 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1969).

The subsequent issuance of a judgment rescinding the order of appeal is void. The appeal was perfected by November 26, 1971. The case is remanded to the Clerk of the City Court in order that the record may be (if it is not now) made complete. The appeal is to be lodged with this court when the record is filed with our Clerk. Costs of this proceeding are assessed to defendant respondent.

Reversed and rendered.

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

Related

Hamilton v. Moss
265 So. 2d 843 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
261 So. 2d 667, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 6765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-v-moss-lactapp-1972.