Valley Securities Co. v. Levy

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Valley Securities Co. v. Levy

132 So. 795, 15 La. App. 639, 1931 La. App. LEXIS 49

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedMarch 2, 1931

DocketNo. 13,756

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 132 So. 795 (Valley Securities Co. v. Levy) 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

Valley Securities Co. v. Levy, 132 So. 795, 15 La. App. 639, 1931 La. App. LEXIS 49 (La. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal upon the ground that it was taken too late. Judgment was rendered and signed in the First city court on January 20, 1931. A motion for devolutive appeal and bond were filed February 4, 1931, or twelve clear days, exclusive of Sundays, thereafter. Appellant admits that the appeal was filed more than ten days after the rendition of the judgment and, consequently, not in compliance with the provisions of Act No. 128 of 1921 (Ex. Sess.), regulating practice in the First city court, but contends that that act is, unconstitutional.

We have given thorough consideration to the subject of the constitutionality of this act in the matter of Estate of Sassinot v. Demourelle, 1 La. App. 160, where the act was held to be constitutional, and subsequently, in the matter of Del Tyler v. Ingraham, 9 La. App. 366, 119 So. 439, where the case of Estate of Sassinot v. Demourelle was reaffirmed. It follows, therefore, that this appeal must be dismissed.

For the reasons herein assigned, the motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained and the appeal ordered dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal upon the ground that it was taken too late. Judgment was rendered and signed in the First city court on January 20, 1931. A motion for devolutive appeal and bond were filed February 4, 1931, or twelve clear days, exclusive of Sundays, thereafter. Appellant admits that the appeal was filed more than ten days after the rendition of the judgment and, consequently, not in compliance with the provisions of Act No. 128 of 1921 (Ex. Sess.), regulating practice in the First city court, but contends that that act is, unconstitutional.

We have given thorough consideration to the subject of the constitutionality of this act in the matter of Estate of Sassinot v. Demourelle, 1 La. App. 160, where the act was held to be constitutional, and subsequently, in the matter of Del Tyler v. Ingraham, 9 La. App. 366, 119 So. 439, where the case of Estate of Sassinot v. Demourelle was reaffirmed. It follows, therefore, that this appeal must be dismissed.

For the reasons herein assigned, the motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained and the appeal ordered dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 So. 795, 15 La. App. 639, 1931 La. App. LEXIS 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valley-securities-co-v-levy-lactapp-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack