Kean's Inc. v. Willoughby

150 So. 40
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided October 5, 1933·No. No. 1147.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In his application for -rehearing, defendant complains that the dismissal of his appeal by the judgment of this court deprives him of the right to prosecute his claim for attorney’s fees and for one week’s wages as contained in his reconventional demand.

These claims, of course, were only incidental to. the main demand, and necessarily had to fall with it.

Moreover, it is apparent that the total amount of the items claimed, as they appear on the face of the papers, is below the! jurisdiction of this court, and we would be without power to entertain them.

The questiort of delays raised in the application was considered and fully explained in the original opinion.

Rehearing refused.

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

Kean's Inc. v. Willoughby, 150 So. 40 (La. Ct. App. 1933).

150 So. 40 (Kean's Inc. v. Willoughby) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Riche v. Ascension Parish School Board
200 So. 681 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1941)