Tolmas v. Tatum

330 So. 2d 357, 1976 La. App. LEXIS 3712
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedApril 13, 1976
DocketNo. 7710
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 330 So. 2d 357 (Tolmas v. Tatum) 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
Tolmas v. Tatum, 330 So. 2d 357, 1976 La. App. LEXIS 3712 (La. Ct. App. 1976).

Opinion

BOUTALL, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment of eviction. Vernon Tatum, Jr., the defendant, has suspensively appealed the judgment. Plaintiff, Oscar J. Tolmas has moved to dismiss the appeal on the grounds that defendant did not file an answer asserting an affirmative defense verified by the oath of the defendant.

The record discloses that no answer was filed in this case. Defendant argues that he asserted his affirmative defense in testimony under oath at the trial. This argument has been considered by this court before and rejected. McMillan v. Cahuvin, 281 So.2d 181 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1973). The jurisprudence has consistently inter[358]*358preted CCP Article 4735 1 as requiring an answer containing the affirmative defense verified by the oath of the defendant.

For the above reasons the suspensive appeal is dismissed at appellant’s cost.

SUSPENSIVE APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

Related

Huff v. Elrert
404 So. 2d 1354 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
330 So. 2d 357, 1976 La. App. LEXIS 3712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tolmas-v-tatum-lactapp-1976.