Helmas v. Pailet

52 So. 676, 126 La. 497, 1910 La. LEXIS 684
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedFebruary 14, 1910
DocketNo. 18,053
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 52 So. 676 (Helmas v. Pailet) 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
Helmas v. Pailet, 52 So. 676, 126 La. 497, 1910 La. LEXIS 684 (La. 1910).

Opinions

On Motion to Dismiss the Appeal.

BREAUX, C. J.

Plaintiffs brought this suit for trespass and they claimed damages in the sum of $5,000.

The case was tried by jury, and verdict was found in favor of defendant.

On this verdict, judgment was rendered on the 15th day of December, 1909, and signed on the 17th of the same month.

The plaintiffs applied for an appeal.

The order granting them an appeal, sus-pensive and devolutive, was signed on the 22d day of December, 1909.

The appeal was made returnable on the 10th day of January, 1910.

On that day, the transcript was filed.

The defendant and appellee moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground alleged: That as the judgment was rendered in favor of defendant and signed on the respective dates before mentioned, and as the bond of appeal [499]*499was not filed until December 29, 1909, the appeal should be dismissed.

Considering the motion to dismiss the sus-pensive appeal.

Suspensive appeals may be taken within 10 days after the judgment has been signed, excluding Sundays. Code Prae. art. 575.

Deducting December 19th and 26th (Sundays) two days, the time for a suspensive appeal had not elapsed.

If the aj>peal were dismissed because not timely taken for a suspensive appeal, the success of the mover would amount really to nothing.

Beyond question the plaintiffs were within time to take a devolutive appeal.

The bond was furnished in the amount required by the judge a quo.

The appeal is good as devolutive if filed after the 10 days. Reed v. His Creditors, 37 La. Ann. 907; Successions of Keller, 39 La. Ann. 579, 2 South. 553; Chaffe v. Carroll, 34 La. Ann. 122; Dwight v. Barrow, 25 La. Ann. 424.

The appeal was timely taken for a suspen-sive appeal.

Motion to dismiss the appeal is therefore overruled.

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

Related

Courvelle v. Eckart
49 So. 2d 658 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1950)
Graziani v. Elder & Walters Equipment Co.
22 So. 2d 841 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1945)
Harrell v. Gondolf
6 La. App. 50 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
52 So. 676, 126 La. 497, 1910 La. LEXIS 684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/helmas-v-pailet-la-1910.