Case ID: so2d_382/html/0455-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "FORET, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John C. GRIMSLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mary TAGERT, Defendant-Appellee.
    
    No. 7766.
    Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
    May 15, 1980.
    Ronald C. Gossen, Lafayette, for plaintiff-appellant.
    Thomas E. Guilbeau, Lafayette, for defendant-appelleé.
    Before FORET, CUTRER and STOKER, JJ.
    
      
      
        Editor’s Note: The opinion of the Court of Appeal of Louisiana in de la Vergne v. de la Vergne, published in the advance sheets at this citation (382 So.2d 455), was withdrawn from bound volume publication at the request of the court.
    
   FORET, Judge.

MOTION TO DISMISS

On March 18, 1980, we ordered the plaintiff-appellant to show cause, on or before April 1, 1980, why his appeal should not be dismissed as being untimely perfected. No response has been made.

The record shows that the above captioned lawsuit was tried on September 27, 1979. Immediately after hearing the evidence, the trial court orally stated that the plaintiff’s suit would be dismissed and that a formal judgment would be signed accordingly.

Formal judgment was rendered and signed on October 29, 1979.

According to LSA-C.C.P. art. 1974, the delay for applying for a new trial is seven days exclusive of legal holidays. The delay begins to run on the day after the judgment was signed.

The delay for taking a devolutive appeal, pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 2087, is sixty days from the expiration of the seven day delay for requesting a new trial.

In the present case, the order of appeal was signed on January 25, 1980, well beyond the time limit for a devolutive appeal. Accordingly, this appeal must be dismissed as being untimely.

APPEAL DISMISSED.