Henri v. Francincues

31 La. 856
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided December 15, 1879·No. No. 7527·Published

Opinions

On Motion to Dismiss.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Manning, O. J.

The dismissal of this appeal is moved on two grounds;

1. want of jurisdiction rationematerice.

2. absence of the oral testimony adduced on the trial.

Either is good. The amount involved is less than five hundred dollars. No portion of the oral testimony was taken in writing. The counsel fdr both parties were unable to agree on a statement of facts, and the judge, upon being required to do so, was unable after the lapse of [857]*857many "weeks after the trial to retain more than a vague and general impression of the testimony. The consequence is that the record does not contain the evidence upon which the judgment is founded, and we are thus unable to review it.

This has often been held to be good ground of dismissal. Boller v. Day, 16 La. 251. Roberts v. Benton, 1 Rob. 100. Clark v. Laidlaw, 4 Rob. 380. Thayer v. Littlefield, 5 Rob. 152.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Henri v. Francincues, 31 La. 856 (La. 1879).

31 La. 856 (Henri v. Francincues) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomasson v. Baum
6 La. 123 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1833)
Bowman v. Janes
6 La. 124 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1834)
Walden v. Parrish
7 La. 245 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1844)
Boler v. Day
16 La. 251 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1840)
Roberts v. Benton
1 Rob. 100 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1841)
Clark v. Laidlaw
4 Rob. 380 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1843)
Thayer v. Littlefield
5 Rob. 152 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1843)