Legal Opinion

Succession of Carollo

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided March 22, 1920No. 7714Published

1Opinion of the Court

*340On liotion to Dismiss.

CHAHLtíS F. CLAIBORIIE, JUDGE.

A motion has been made in this Court to dismiss the appeal herein on the two folloMng ¿rounds:

lo that no surety has si.rned the appeal bond; and

So That no citation of appeal was served until July 29th, although the appeal was granted on petition by order dated July 3d, and made returnable on July 28th.

The name of the surety is not mentioned in the body of the bond. The bond is signed by the appellant, the "Succession of Antonio Carollo by F. kanale, Administrator" . "Signed, sealfd, and delivered in the presence of (signature) Cassidy…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Banks v. McCosker & MolloyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1896
  2. Truby v. PalmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
  3. Collins v. BriggsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1833
  4. State v. Lehigh Valley Terminal Railway Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1893

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API