Case ID: la-app_3/html/0446-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "CLAIBORNE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 10,333
    Orleans
    TONY BUSKO v. JOHN MIHALJEVICH, Appellant.
    (January 1, 1926. Opinion and Decree.)
    
      (Syllabus by the Court.)
    
    1. Louisiana Digest—Appeal—Par. 512.
    When the appeal is frivolous damages will be allowed.
    Appeal from First City Court, Div. “C”, Hon. W. Y. Seeber, Judge.
    This is a suit upon a promissory note for $150.00, with interest and ten per cent attorney’s fees. There was judgment for plaintiff and defendant appealed, but did not argue the case or present a brief in the Court of Appeal.
    Judgment affirmed, with ten per cent damages for frivolous appeal.
    A. B. Leopold of New Orleans, attorney for plaintiff, appellee.
    Clarence J. Dowling of New Orleans,' attorney for defendant, appellant.
   CLAIBORNE, J.

This is a suit upon a promissory note for $150, interest and ten per cent attorney’s fees.

The defense is that the note was given in part payment of a restaurant and fixtures; that the ■ plaintiff took away from the same against defendant’s consent a number of articles of the value of $150, which defendant pleads in compensation.

Upon the trial of the ease the defendant, although represented by counsel, offered no evidence, and judgment was rendered against him, reserving his rights under his plea of compensation. From this judgment the defendant has appealed. Plaintiff prays for damages for frivolous appeal.

In this Court the defendant has not favored us with argument or brief to indicate error in judgment below.

We see none ourselves and the judgment is therefore affirmed -with ten per cent damages for frivolous appeal.