Successions of Clairteaux

35 La. Ann. 1178
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided December 15, 1883·No. No. 8867·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinions

On Motion to Dismiss.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Bermudez, C. J.

C. A. Philippi & Co., Ferdinand Samuel and Jules Samuel, appeal from judgments dismissing the oppositions which they have respectively filed to the accounts rendered in these two successions.

The administratrices move that the appeal taken by the Samuels be dismissed, among other reasons, because, there being two judgments, there should have been two motions and orders of appeal and two [1179]*1179bonds, one in each case, as there were two suits in each succession, and one bond only was furnished.

The oppositions were not consolidated below, to be tried together and determined by one and the same judgment. The order of consolidation was made after judgment. There were two judgments rendered, and two appeals taken. There should have been two bonds given. The appeals of F. and J. Samuel are dismissed

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

Successions of Clairteaux, 35 La. Ann. 1178 (La. 1883).

35 La. Ann. 1178 (Successions of Clairteaux) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Phillips v. West
139 So. 2d 274 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1962)
Vienne v. Chalona
14 So. 2d 54 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1943)
Vienne v. Chalona
8 So. 2d 122 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1942)
Succession of Tacon
182 So. 133 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1938)
Pichon v. Pichon Land Co.
139 So. 764 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1932)
Palmetto Moss Factory v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.
82 So. 700 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1916)
American Trust Co. v. Crescent Ice Co.
68 So. 386 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1915)
Succession of Housknecht
66 So. 233 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1913)