Smith v. Atkins

40 So. 2d 475, 40 So. 2d 476, 215 La. 310, 1949 La. LEXIS 946
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided April 25, 1949·No. No. 39295.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PONDER, Justice.

The plaintiff, -appellee, moves to di-s-miss the -appeal in thi-s e-ase -on the -ground -that the transcript is incomplete.

An appeal will -not be -dismissed without first -allowing the appellant time to complete -the transcript -in -compliance with the provisions of Act 234 of 1932.

Upon submission of the motion to dismiss the appeal, the appellant has filed a supplemental transcript -containing the documents -that the -appellee claims were left out of the transcript. On three prior occasions we have entertained -controversies between the parties -to this suit involving the property in -dispute herein. See Atkins v. Smith, 204 La. 468, 15 So. 2d 855; Atkins v. Smith, 207 La. 560, 21 So.2d 728 -and Smith v. Atkin-s, 211 La. 369, 30 So.2d 121. It was not necessary to incorporate in the transcript a -copy of our opinions in those cases or portions of ou-r records -in the prior suits because we can take cognizance of our -own -records.

For the reasons assigned, the motion is denied.

O’NIELL, C. J., takes no -part.

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

Smith v. Atkins, 40 So. 2d 475, 40 So. 2d 476, 215 La. 310, 1949 La. LEXIS 946 (La. 1949).

40 So. 2d 475 (Smith v. Atkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Timon v. Timon
69 So. 2d 370 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1953)
State v. Scott
46 So. 2d 315 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1950)