Case Name: CHEVRON CHEMICAL COMPANY v. CRESCENT RIVER PORT PILOTS ASSOCIATION
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1980-06-23
Citations: 385 So. 2d 42
Docket Number: No. 11685
Parties: CHEVRON CHEMICAL COMPANY v. CRESCENT RIVER PORT PILOTS ASSOCIATION.
Judges: Before SAMUEL, REDMANN and SCHOTT, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 385
Pages: 42–43

Head Matter:
CHEVRON CHEMICAL COMPANY v. CRESCENT RIVER PORT PILOTS ASSOCIATION.
No. 11685.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
June 23, 1980.
Walter W. Christy and Michael D. Bew-ers, New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellant.
Joseph W. Nelkin, New Orleans, for defendant-appellee.
Before SAMUEL, REDMANN and SCHOTT, JJ.

Opinion:
SCHOTT, Judge.
This case is before us on a motion, ex proprio motu, to dismiss the appeal. The following chronology is pertinent:
May 27,1980 Judgment announced orally by the trial court at the conclusion of trial.
June 3,1980 Motion for appeal by appellant.
June 9, 1980 Judgment signed by trial court.
June 20, 1980 Record lodged in this court.
Under the provision of C.C.P. Art. 1911 as amended by Act 618 of 1979, this appeal is vulnerable to dismissal because it was taken before the judgment was signed. However, the posture of this case is identical to that of Lang v. Reynolds, 386 So.2d 126 (1980) in that appellant has until June 24, 1980, in which to take a new appeal so that the only effect of a dismissal would be to require appellant to go back to the trial court, obtain another order of appeal and relodge the record in this court. As in Lang, we see no point to such a requirement.
Accordingly, we consider the present appeal to be valid and we therefore deny our own motion to dismiss.
MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED.