Sladovich v. Eureka Homestead Society

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Sladovich v. Eureka Homestead Society

108 So. 478, 161 La. 270, 1926 La. LEXIS 2048

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMarch 29, 1926

DocketNo. 26290.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 108 So. 478 (Sladovich v. Eureka Homestead Society) 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

Sladovich v. Eureka Homestead Society, 108 So. 478, 161 La. 270, 1926 La. LEXIS 2048 (La. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

O’NIELL, C. J.

This is a suit to annul the judgment that was rendered against the present plaintiffs as defendants in the suit of the Eureka Homestead Society v. George Sladovich, Sr. and Jr. (No. 25914) 108 So. 477, 1 decided to-day. This appeal is from a judgment dismissing the action of nullity on an exception of no cause of action, because the complaints made by the plaintiffs here were being brought up by their appeal from the judgment which they were suing to annul.

The exception of no cause of action was properly sustained. Every issue tendered- by the plaintiffs’ petition in this suit was presented by their appeal from the judgment which they are now suing to annul, and was disposed of by our decree affirming the judgment. The appeal from that judgment was taken and perfected by the filing of an appeal bond before this suit to annul the judgment was filed. A party against whom a judgment has been rendered cannot sue to annul the judgment for a cause for which it may be annulled on an appeal which he has taken. Gilmore v. Gilmore, 9 La. Ann. 204; Taliaferro v. Steele, 14 La. Ann. 656; Blanck v. Speckman, 23 La. Ann. 146; Esterbrook v. Gauche, 27 La. Ann. 36; Payne & Joubert v. Schaeffer-Gaiennie Co., 44 So. 134, 119 La. 382.

The judgment is affirmed.

1

Ante, p. 265.

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

O’NIELL, C. J.

This is a suit to annul the judgment that was rendered against the present plaintiffs as defendants in the suit of the Eureka Homestead Society v. George Sladovich, Sr. and Jr. (No. 25914) 108 So. 477, 1 decided to-day. This appeal is from a judgment dismissing the action of nullity on an exception of no cause of action, because the complaints made by the plaintiffs here were being brought up by their appeal from the judgment which they were suing to annul.

The exception of no cause of action was properly sustained. Every issue tendered- by the plaintiffs’ petition in this suit was presented by their appeal from the judgment which they are now suing to annul, and was disposed of by our decree affirming the judgment. The appeal from that judgment was taken and perfected by the filing of an appeal bond before this suit to annul the judgment was filed. A party against whom a judgment has been rendered cannot sue to annul the judgment for a cause for which it may be annulled on an appeal which he has taken. Gilmore v. Gilmore, 9 La. Ann. 204; Taliaferro v. Steele, 14 La. Ann. 656; Blanck v. Speckman, 23 La. Ann. 146; Esterbrook v. Gauche, 27 La. Ann. 36; Payne & Joubert v. Schaeffer-Gaiennie Co., 44 So. 134, 119 La. 382.

The judgment is affirmed.

1

Ante, p. 265.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 So. 478, 161 La. 270, 1926 La. LEXIS 2048, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sladovich-v-eureka-homestead-society-la-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack