Hauch v. E. C. Drew Inv. Co.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Hauch v. E. C. Drew Inv. Co.

40 So. 847, 116 La. 488, 1906 La. LEXIS 519

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMarch 26, 1906

DocketNo. 15,812

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 40 So. 847 (Hauch v. E. C. Drew Inv. Co.) 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

Hauch v. E. C. Drew Inv. Co., 40 So. 847, 116 La. 488, 1906 La. LEXIS 519 (La. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

MONROE, J.

This is a suit for the recovery of damages alleged to have arisen ex contractu, which was dismissed upon an exception of no cause of action. It appears, however, that the judgment from which the plaintiff has attempted to appeal was not signed, and the appellee moves to dismiss the appeal on that ground. The motion must be sustained. To quote the language of this court, in a case heretofore decided:

“The effect of the decree of the district court, sustaining the exception of no cause of action, is necessarily in the nature of a final judgment, and has the effect of terminating the litigation upon the issue stated. In other words, [490]*490the same suit could not be renewed and another judgment provoked on the same cause of action. Such being the case, * * * the appeal is necessarily premature.” Nicholls v. Maddox, 52 La. Ann. 496, 26 South. 994.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the appeal herein be dismissed, at the cost of the appellant.

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

MONROE, J.

This is a suit for the recovery of damages alleged to have arisen ex contractu, which was dismissed upon an exception of no cause of action. It appears, however, that the judgment from which the plaintiff has attempted to appeal was not signed, and the appellee moves to dismiss the appeal on that ground. The motion must be sustained. To quote the language of this court, in a case heretofore decided:

“The effect of the decree of the district court, sustaining the exception of no cause of action, is necessarily in the nature of a final judgment, and has the effect of terminating the litigation upon the issue stated. In other words, [490]*490the same suit could not be renewed and another judgment provoked on the same cause of action. Such being the case, * * * the appeal is necessarily premature.” Nicholls v. Maddox, 52 La. Ann. 496, 26 South. 994.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the appeal herein be dismissed, at the cost of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 So. 847, 116 La. 488, 1906 La. LEXIS 519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hauch-v-e-c-drew-inv-co-la-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack