Duperron v. Van Wickle
Supreme Court of Louisiana
The defendants are appellants from a judgment of the District Court of Poinle Coupee, Nicholls, J. moved to dismiss the appeal; on the ground, among others, that the bond of the appellant was not executed conformably to the order of appeal, it being for one hundred and fifty dollars only, while the order required one for five hundred and fifty. 5 Mart., N. S., 237. 2 La., 88. The effect of the error in the amount of the appeal bond, is to render the appeal devolutive,…
Read the full summary
The defendants are appellants from a judgment of the District Court of Poinle Coupee, Nicholls, J. moved to dismiss the appeal; on the ground, among others, that the bond of the appellant was not executed conformably to the order of appeal, it being for one hundred and fifty dollars only, while the order required one for five hundred and fifty. 5 Mart., N. S., 237. 2 La., 88. The effect of the error in the amount of the appeal bond, is to render the appeal devolutive, instead of suspensive.
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The dismissal of this appeal is asked for on the ground, that a bond was given for a sum less than was required by *325the order of the judge. The judgment is for three hundred and fifty dollars. A suspensive appeal was prayed for ; the judge in grantingit, required a bond to be given for the sum of five hundred and fifty dollars ; and the bond given is for one hundred and fifty only. The Code of Practice, art. 574, provides, ‘ that the judge in granting the appeal, shall state, at the foot of the petition of appeal, the, amount of the surety to be given by the appellant.’ This article of the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Widow & Heirs of Beaird v. RussSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1880
- Surget v. StantonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1855
- Lochbaum v. Southwestern Box & Lumber Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1907
- Hamann v. ReineckeLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1906