Shuff v. Wright

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Shuff v. Wright

258 So. 2d 690, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 6577

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedMarch 2, 1972

DocketNo. 3807

StatusPublished

This text of 258 So. 2d 690 (Shuff v. Wright) 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

Shuff v. Wright, 258 So. 2d 690, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 6577 (La. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

DOMENGEAUX, Judge.

This case is before us on a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appeal bond has not been timely filed.

Article 2088 of the La.Code of Civil Procedure provides that the jurisdiction of the trial court is divested, and that of the appellate court attaches, upon the timely filing of the appeal bond in the trial court if a bond is required. Although the order of appeal signed by the trial judge specified a One Hundred and no/100 ($100.00) Dollar bond, the record contains no evidence that such bond was ever filed and the jurisdiction of this court has therefore never attached. Arnold v. Arnold, 217 La. 362, 46 So.2d 298; City of Baton Rouge v. Kiper, La.App., 96 So.2d 241.

The motion to dismiss presents the issue of whether the ninety (90) days granted appellant within which to file his bond by La.C.C.P. Art. 2087 have expired. We, however, have no power to determine that issue, since for the reasons hereinabove set out, we lack jurisdiction over the case.

Accordingly, the case is remanded to the district court for a determination of whether the time allowed for the posting of the appeal bond has indeed expired, and if so, for the rescission of its order of appeal.

Remanded.

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

ON MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

DOMENGEAUX, Judge.

This case is before us on a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appeal bond has not been timely filed.

Article 2088 of the La.Code of Civil Procedure provides that the jurisdiction of the trial court is divested, and that of the appellate court attaches, upon the timely filing of the appeal bond in the trial court if a bond is required. Although the order of appeal signed by the trial judge specified a One Hundred and no/100 ($100.00) Dollar bond, the record contains no evidence that such bond was ever filed and the jurisdiction of this court has therefore never attached. Arnold v. Arnold, 217 La. 362, 46 So.2d 298; City of Baton Rouge v. Kiper, La.App., 96 So.2d 241.

The motion to dismiss presents the issue of whether the ninety (90) days granted appellant within which to file his bond by La.C.C.P. Art. 2087 have expired. We, however, have no power to determine that issue, since for the reasons hereinabove set out, we lack jurisdiction over the case.

Accordingly, the case is remanded to the district court for a determination of whether the time allowed for the posting of the appeal bond has indeed expired, and if so, for the rescission of its order of appeal.

Remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 So. 2d 690, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 6577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shuff-v-wright-lactapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack