Troegel v. King
Supreme Court of Louisiana
y^PPLICATION for Certiorari and Mandamus. Where there is a judgment for money against one defendant who does not appeal the other cannot appeal suspensively without giving bond as required by C. P. 575, exceeding by one-half the amount ofjthe judgment.
Read the full summary
y^PPLICATION for Certiorari and Mandamus. Where there is a judgment for money against one defendant who does not appeal the other cannot appeal suspensively without giving bond as required by C. P. 575, exceeding by one-half the amount ofjthe judgment. The insurance company, the defendant, condemned to pay $1144.02, is not an officer of the court, nor is the money in the hands of the court, and the district judge has no authority to order a suspensive appeal on either defendant giving bond in a sum less than that required by law, and it was the duty of the district judge to rescind the…
1Opinion of the Court
*422The opinion of the court was delivered by
Breaux, J.
The relator seeks, by the interposition of the writs of certiorari and mandamus to compel the respondent to' rescind his order for a suspensive appeal.
The appeal was made suspensive on a bond for an amount sufficient to pay costs.
The record of appeal is now lodged, under the order of appeal issued by the respondent, in the clerk’s office of the Court of Appeals.
The controversy involves an amount of eleven hundred and forty-four dollars, in the hands of the agent of the Manhattan Mutual Life Insurance Company.
The relator claimed to be the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. WoodsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1904
- Koshland v. JonesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1928
- State ex rel. Truxillo v. GilbertLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1930