Case ID: teiss_12/html/0291-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "His Honor, EMILE GODCHAUX,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 6364.
    PETER B. CULLOM vs. CHARLES F. EPSTEIN.
    Syllabus.
    Where the lower Court dismissed an appeal for insufficiency of the surety, a motion in this Court to dismiss the appeal, accompanied by the judgment of the lower Court to that effect, will prevail in the absence of any indication that the ruling of the lower Court has, in a manner provided by law, been brought up for review.
    Appeal from the Civil District Court, for the Parish of Orleans, Division “C,” No. 101,004. Honorable E. K. Skinner, Judge.
    Robert O’Connor, for plaintiff and appellee.
    
      Opinion and decree, April 19th, 1915.
    Nix & Parkerson, for defendant and .appellant.
   His Honor, EMILE GODCHAUX,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

A motion has been made in this Court to dismiss the appeal taken by Charles Epstein, defendant, and there accompanies said motion the certified proceedings and a judgment of the trial Court, rendered since the filing of the transcript in this Court, dismissing said appeal on the ground that the surety on the ¡appeal bond was not solvent or sufficient.

As it does not appear that the appellant has in any manner provided by law sought to reverse or review the judgment of the trial Court dismissing his appeal, the motion in this Court to dismiss the appeal must prevail.

Forman vs. Fayard, 7 Ct. of Appeal, 490.

It is accordingly ordered that the .appeal of Charles Epstein, defendant, be dismissed at his costs.

Appeal dismissed.