Nordyke v. Continental Service Life & Health Insurance Co.

469 So. 2d 35, 1985 La. App. LEXIS 9389
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedApril 16, 1985
DocketNo. CA 84 0828
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 469 So. 2d 35 (Nordyke v. Continental Service Life & Health Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Nordyke v. Continental Service Life & Health Insurance Co., 469 So. 2d 35, 1985 La. App. LEXIS 9389 (La. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

ALFORD, Judge.

Plaintiffs-appellees, Keith B. Nordyke, et al., filed a motion to dismiss the appeal of defendants-appellants, Continental Service Life & Health Insurance Co., et al. Grounds for dismissal urged by appellees are abandonment, failure to serve appellants’ brief on counsel for appellees, and failure of appellants to file their brief through counsel of record.

Judgment was rendered in this action in the lower court on March 9, 1984, and was read and signed on March 22, 1984. Following defendants’ motion, a devolutive appeal was entered on March 22, 1984.

The record was lodged with this court on July 10, 1984. On July 25, 1984, defendants-appellants filed a motion for extension of time within which to file their brief. This court on July 25, 1984, granted an initial extension, allowing appellants to file their brief on or before August 23, 1984. Subsequently, another extension of the time for filing the appellants’ brief was granted, on motion of appellants, by this court on August 23, 1984, extending the period through September 4, 1984.

Upon the failure of the appellants to file a brief within the times provided in the Uniform Rules of the Courts of Appeal,1 the clerk of this court issued notice pursuant to Rule 2-8.62 by letter dated and mailed September 6, 1984, to counsel for appellants that the appeal would be dismissed thirty days from date unless a brief was filed within that thirty days. Appellants did not file their brief until 5:26 p.m. on October 9, 1984.

Thirty days from September 6, 1984 (date of our clerk’s letter to appellants’ counsel) would expire on October 6, 1984, a Saturday. Accordingly, it would appear that the appellants’ brief could have been filed no later than October 8, 1984, the following Monday. Therefore, the filing of appellants’ brief on October 9, 1984, was clearly late.

In Talley v. Hughes, 438 So.2d 263, 264 (La.App. 4th Cir.1983), the court discussed Rule 2-8.6 as follows:

Rule 2-8.6 merely sets a time by which an appellant is obliged to make his argu[37]*37ment by written brief to this court and then, if that first time is not met, the rule provides that the court notifies the appellant that his or her appeal will be dismissed if the brief is not filed by a specified date 30 days after the notice. If the brief is still not filed, the rule provides that the appeal “shall” be dismissed. (emphasis added)

Rule 2-8.6 is mandatory in its requirement that appeals shall be dismissed if the rule is not met. The rule was not met in this case and, therefore, this court has no alternative but to consider the appeal abandoned. Because of our decision on this issue, we find it unnecessary to address appellees’ other grounds for dismissal.

MOTION GRANTED.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
469 So. 2d 35, 1985 La. App. LEXIS 9389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nordyke-v-continental-service-life-health-insurance-co-lactapp-1985.