Case Name: Nicholas Murray v. John Walker
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1856-01
Citations: 11 La. Ann. 72
Docket Number: 
Parties: Nicholas Murray v. John Walker.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 11
Pages: 72–73

Head Matter:
Nicholas Murray v. John Walker.
A reed's was offered in evidence, but not filed, and therefore not copied by the Clerk in making up the transcript for the Supreme Court The transcript was brought up by the appellee, who moved to dismiss the appeal. By the cou/ri: It was the duty of the appellant to present her casein such a shape that this court could pass upon the correctness of the judgment appealed from. It is true the appellee has brought up the appeal, on the failure of the appellant todo so. But the deficiency of the record is plainly the fault of the appellant, which should not prejudice appellee. Appeal dismissed.
Ü PPEAL from the Third District Court of New Orleans, Kennedy, J.
Durant S Hornor, for plaintiff. Dunlap, for defendant and appellant.

Opinion:
Buchanan, J.
(Merrick, C. J., absent.) This is a proceeding by third opposition on the part of defendant's wife, claiming to be paid, by preference over plaintiff, out of the proceeds of property sold in execution, the amount of an alleged judgment obtained by her against her husband. She is appellant from a decision of the District Court adverse to her claim.
In support of her third opposition, the appellant offered in evidence " the whole of the record of the suit No. 7773 in the First District Court, entitled Caroline L. Campbell, wife of John Walker, v. Her Husband." But the certificate of the Clerk of the court to the transcript, declares, that the record in question, though offered in evidence, was not filed; and consequently that it is not copied. It was the duty of appellant to present her case in such a shape that this court could pass upon the correctness of the judgment appealed from. It is true the appellee has brought up the appeal, on the failure of the appellant to do so. But the deficiency in the record above mentioned, is plainly the fault of the appellant, which should not prejudice the appellee. The appeal is dismissed, with costs.