Sittig v. Littell

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Sittig v. Littell

21 La. Ann. 646

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedSeptember 15, 1869

DocketNo. 622

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 21 La. Ann. 646 (Sittig v. Littell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sittig v. Littell, 21 La. Ann. 646 (La. 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

Howell, J.

In this case judgment in solido was obtained against the two makers and the indorser of a promissory note, from which the two makers took this appeal by petition and asked that the plaintiff be cited. It is manifest that the indorser has an interest and should be a party to the appeal, and as this court will notice, of its own motion, the want of proper parties, the appeal must be dismissed. 12 R. 203 ; 4 A. 577; 11 A. 409; 12 A. 755, 774, 801; 3 A. 317; 19 A. 137.

It is therefore ordered that the appeal herein be dismissed with costs.

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

Howell, J.

In this case judgment in solido was obtained against the two makers and the indorser of a promissory note, from which the two makers took this appeal by petition and asked that the plaintiff be cited. It is manifest that the indorser has an interest and should be a party to the appeal, and as this court will notice, of its own motion, the want of proper parties, the appeal must be dismissed. 12 R. 203 ; 4 A. 577; 11 A. 409; 12 A. 755, 774, 801; 3 A. 317; 19 A. 137.

It is therefore ordered that the appeal herein be dismissed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 La. Ann. 646, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sittig-v-littell-la-1869.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack