Legal Opinion

Nicholas v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided February 26, 1934No. 14809PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

This matter comes before us on motion to dismiss the appeal. The only ground presented for dismissal is that the appeal “is utterly frivolous.”

In Succession of Damico, 161 La. 725, 109 So. 402, 403, the Supreme Court, in refusing to dismiss an appeal on the ground that it had not been seriously taken, said:

“ * * * in all cases where an appeal lies, such appeal must be granted, and cannot be denied because it is said to be frivolous, or taken merely for delay, or only ‘to abuse the right of appeal.’ State ex rel. Duffard v. Recorder, 45 La. Ann. 1299, 14 So. 66.
“The remedy for an alleged…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Cochran v. Louisiana State Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  2. Borden v. Louisiana State Board of EducationSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1929
  3. Baker v. FrellsenSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1880
  4. Succession of DamicoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1925
  5. Cochran v. Louisiana State Board of EducationSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1929

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Diecidue v. KilpatrickLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API