Case Name: Mrs. S. C. Lane v. Joshua G. Clarke-Heirs of Lane et als. Intervenors
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1875-03
Citations: 27 La. 201
Docket Number: No. 5666
Parties: Mrs. S. C. Lane v. Joshua G. Clarke-Heirs of Lane et als. Intervenors.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 27
Pages: 201–202

Head Matter:
No. 5666.
Mrs. S. C. Lane v. Joshua G. Clarke-Heirs of Lane et als. Intervenors.
The certificate of the clerk of the court a qua as to all the matters in regard to plaintiff, defendant, and the intervenors who have appealed, is sufficiently full. The proceedings as-to the intervenor Bender, who did not appeal, are not material in the controversy between the parties before this court, and their omission from the record can not prejudice or affect the parties.
The record shows that the citations on the intervenors were served, but before the specified delay expired, and before issue was formed thereon either by default or otherwise, the plaintiff caused the default taken by her. against the defendant to be confirmed and the intervention dismissed. This was irregular and premature. Issue should have been joined.
APPEAL from the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, parish of Mad-_£1_ ison. Sough, J.
F. _D. <& W. Farra/r, for plaintiff and appellee. J. W. Montgomery, for defendant and intervenors, appellants.

Opinion:
Howell, J.
A motion is made to dismiss this appeal on the grounds:
First — That one Bender, who was an intervenor, is not made a party. The record shows that his intervention was dismissed as of nonsuit, and he has not appealed. He therefore has no interest in maintaining the judgment between plaintiff and defendant, and is not a necessary party to the appeal. He is no longer a party to the suit.
Second — The certificate of the clerk is not full and unqualified that the record contains all the testimony adduced, all the documents filed and all the proceedings had on the trial.
It certifies as to all these matters in regard to plaintiff, defendant, and the intervenors who have appealed. The proceedings as to the intervenor Bender, who did not appeal, are not material in the controversy between the parties before this court, and their omission from the record can not prejudice or affect said parties. The motion to dismiss is therefore overruled.