Osborne v. Clayton
3 Rob. 437
Opinion
The defendants are appellants from a decree overruling a motion to dissolve an injunction, sued out by the plaintiff to stay the execution of a judgment they had obtained against him in the inferior court. This appeal is clearly premature, as the order made on the trial of the motion is an interlocutory, not a final, decree. It works no irreparable injury to the appellants. The error, if any has been committed, can be corrected by appeal from the final judgment in the case. Code Pract., art. 566.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Osborne v. Clayton, 3 Rob. 437 (La. 1843).
3 Rob. 437 (Osborne v. Clayton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Keegan v. Board of Com'rs
98 So. 50 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1923)
Castell Land & Harbor Co. v. Roberts
95 So. 421 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1923)
Wendling v. Dixie Ice Mfg. Co.
46 So. 205 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1908)