Saunders v. Saunders
This text of 408 So. 2d 59 (Saunders v. Saunders) 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.
Opinion
[60]*60ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff-appellee, Lawrence C. Saunders, moves to dismiss the appeal filed by defendant-appellant, Elizabeth Budd Saunders, from a judgment of divorce on the ground that the appellant has not timely filed a suspensive appeal with sufficient bond or security. We deny the motion to dismiss.
From the decree of divorce rendered on July 7, 1981, the wife timely filed a petition for appeal on August 7, 1981. The trial judge granted an order for appeal on the same day, but no bond was set nor security furnished.
LSA-C.C.P. Art. 8942 provides for a thirty-day appeal period from a judgment granting a divorce and states that such appeal shall suspend the execution of the judgment insofar as it relates to the divorce.1 This procedural article, however, makes no requirement that a “suspensive” appeal be taken or that bond or security be furnished; it merely states that the effect of the appeal is to suspend the execution of the judgment.
As pointed out in Post v. Post, 376 So.2d 1275 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1979), a devolutive appeal may be perfected without the filing of a bond, and, under LSA-C.C.P. Art. 3942, any appeal timely perfected from a judgment of separation suspends the execution of the judgment, whether it is called a suspensive or devolutive appeal. We are in agreement with our brothers on the Second Circuit that it is not necessary that the appellant post a suspensive appeal bond from judgments of separation, divorce or annulment.
For the foregoing reasons, we deny the motion to dismiss.
MOTION DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
408 So. 2d 59, 1982 La. App. LEXIS 6661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saunders-v-saunders-lactapp-1982.