Hill v. Tuzzine

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Hill v. Tuzzine

1 Mart. (N.S.) 599

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJuly 1, 1823

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 Mart. (N.S.) 599 (Hill v. Tuzzine) 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

Hill v. Tuzzine, 1 Mart. (N.S.) 599 (La. 1823).

Pincite

Opinion

Porter, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. The defendant has appealed, and assigns as errors, appearing on the face of the record, matters which could have been cured by evidence legally introduced on the trial, without his consent. The presumption is they were introduced, and this is so clearly the case that the appellant must be considered to have taken the appeal for the sole purpose of delay.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged anti decreed, that the judgment of the district court be affirmed, with costs and damages at ten per centum, on said judgment, for the delay.

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

Porter, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. The defendant has appealed, and assigns as errors, appearing on the face of the record, matters which could have been cured by evidence legally introduced on the trial, without his consent. The presumption is they were introduced, and this is so clearly the case that the appellant must be considered to have taken the appeal for the sole purpose of delay.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged anti decreed, that the judgment of the district court be affirmed, with costs and damages at ten per centum, on said judgment, for the delay.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Mart. (N.S.) 599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-tuzzine-la-1823.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack