Ridgdell v. Tangipahoa Parish School Board

17 So. 2d 386, 1944 La. App. LEXIS 181
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ridgdell v. Tangipahoa Parish School Board. Read the opinion of the Court — 1944 La. App. LEXIS 159
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided April 5, 1944·No. No. 2619.·Published

Opinion

Due notice of judgment was given by registered mail to the assistant district attorney representing the defendant and who had submitted the case before this Court. Receipt of notice was acknowledged on March 8th, 1944, the registry receipt card being signed by Enid L. Sims, addressee's agent.

Application for rehearing was made by the District Attorney and was not filed with the Clerk of this Court until March 27th, 1944.

The notice given to the Assistant District Attorney was proper and sufficient notice and obviously the application for rehearing filed by the District Attorney, although his name appeared as counsel of record, came too late to be considered. Acknowledgment by the addressee's agent was also sufficient. See McCaskey Register Co. v. Lumpkin, La.App., 197 So. 640.

For these reasons the application is not considered.

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

Ridgdell v. Tangipahoa Parish School Board, 17 So. 2d 386, 1944 La. App. LEXIS 181 (La. Ct. App. 1944).

17 So. 2d 386 (Ridgdell v. Tangipahoa Parish School Board) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McCaskey Register Co. v. Lumpkin
197 So. 640 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1940)