Case Name: G. W. Denton v. A. B. Reading
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1870-12
Citations: 22 La. Ann. 607
Docket Number: No. 2079
Parties: G. W. Denton v. A. B. Reading.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 22
Pages: 607–609

Head Matter:
No. 2079.
G. W. Denton v. A. B. Reading.
If *the language used in an act of the General Assembly is clear and free from ambiguity courts will not give it a different interpretation from that which the words used clearly import.
In the year 1859 plaintiff entered into a contract with defendant for the sale of a certain valuable property in the city of New Orleans. At that time a suit was pending in the Third District Court of New Orleans between plaintiff and "Woods for the ownership of the property. The conditions of the contract were that if the plaintiff was successful in the suit, he was to sell the property to Reading, the defendant, for $20,000, fifteen hundred dollars of which was to he paid in cash at the termination of the suit by a final decision of the Supreme Court, or at the end of twelve months-from the decision of the district court, if no appeal was taken. The remainder was to be paid in six equal annual installments consecutively, for which notes were to he furnished stipulating six per cent, per annum from date until maturity, and eight per cent, thereafter* It was further agreed that if the final decision be delayed beyond the eighteenth of June, 1860, the whole price should draw six per cent, per annum from that date. The suit was finally decided by the Supremo Court on the eighteenth of June, 1867. Held — That the latter clause or stipulation in the contract furnished the proper basis or data on which to predicate the calculation of interest j that under this clause interest from that date, the eighteenth of June, 1860, at the rate of six per cent, per annum, was due on the cash portion of the price, fifteen hundred dollars, and a like rate on the different installments up to their respective maturities, and eight per cent, thereafter.
APPEAL from the Sixth District Court of New Orleans. Cooley, J„
D. C. Labatt, for plaintiff and appellee. Samuel JR. Walker, for defendant and appellant.

Opinion:
On the Motxon to Dismiss.
Taliaferro, J.
A motion to dismiss this appeal is made on the ground that the amount of the appeal bond is not sufficient to authorize a suspensive appeal, inasmuch as it does not exceed by one-half the sum for which, the judgment was rendered. This we find is the case. But under the provisions of the act of the Legislature of September 29, 1868, the bond is required to exceed one-half the amount of the. judgment. We find the law so written, and see no grounds to authorizens to give it a different interpretation. This bond was executed before that act was amended, and as it does largely exceed one-half the. amount of the judgment, it should he maintained.
It is therefore ordered that the motion to dismiss the appeal be. overruled.