Kelly, Weber & Co. v. Vordenbaumen Lumber Co.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Kelly, Weber & Co. v. Vordenbaumen Lumber Co.

61 So. 870, 132 La. 916, 1913 La. LEXIS 1962

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedApril 14, 1913

DocketNo. 19,161

StatusPublished

This text of 61 So. 870 (Kelly, Weber & Co. v. Vordenbaumen Lumber 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

Kelly, Weber & Co. v. Vordenbaumen Lumber Co., 61 So. 870, 132 La. 916, 1913 La. LEXIS 1962 (La. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

MONROE, J.

The clerk of the district •court has appealed from a judgment rejecting his demand for the payment of $194.50, which he alleges is due him by the plaintiff in the above-entitled suit “for preparing a ■copy of the transcript of the parol testimony taken on the trial of this cause,” for the appeal whereby the case was brought to this court, the cause thus referred to being the •cause bearing the above title, with the number 19,065 of the docket of this court (62 South. 910, 133 La. —), and which has been this day decided.

The ground upon which the appellate jurisdiction of this court is invoked has not been indicated by tbe learned counsel, and we know of none upon which it might be supposed to rest.

The appeal is therefore dismissed, at the •cost of the appellant.

PROVOSTY, J., dissents.

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

MONROE, J.

The clerk of the district •court has appealed from a judgment rejecting his demand for the payment of $194.50, which he alleges is due him by the plaintiff in the above-entitled suit “for preparing a ■copy of the transcript of the parol testimony taken on the trial of this cause,” for the appeal whereby the case was brought to this court, the cause thus referred to being the •cause bearing the above title, with the number 19,065 of the docket of this court (62 South. 910, 133 La. —), and which has been this day decided.

The ground upon which the appellate jurisdiction of this court is invoked has not been indicated by tbe learned counsel, and we know of none upon which it might be supposed to rest.

The appeal is therefore dismissed, at the •cost of the appellant.

PROVOSTY, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 So. 870, 132 La. 916, 1913 La. LEXIS 1962, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelly-weber-co-v-vordenbaumen-lumber-co-la-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack