Case Name: John T. Michel v. Zerilla Meter et al.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1875-02
Citations: 27 La. 173
Docket Number: No. 5462
Parties: John T. Michel v. Zerilla Meter et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 27
Pages: 173–174

Head Matter:
No. 5462.
John T. Michel v. Zerilla Meter et al.
■Where the transcript of the appeal was filed on the seventh of November, 1874, and on the eleventh the defendants, appellees herein, filed an answer praying for an amendment of the judgment, and where on the fourteenth they moved, to dismiss the appeal, because the appeal bond was not for a sufficient amount, because the transcript was not filed in time; and because the clerk certifying the record omitted to append his signature;
Held--That the motion came too late.
Besides, having joined in the appeal, the appellants ought not to be heard asking for its dismissal.
The certificate appended to the record should be signed by the clerk. This court, of its own motion, orders it to bo done, and denies the motion to dismiss.
In this instance, where the plaintiff injoined an order of seizure and sale issued on behalf of defendants, the judge a quo did not err in dissolving the injunction for the sum really due by plaintiff, and perpetuating it as to the small sum received by defendant and to be credited to plaintiff, but he should have allowed damages on the amount that was due. The remittitur by defendants is an admission that the writ issued for more than was due. The making of a remittitur does not remove the existence of the cause for the injunction, to that extent, at the date of its issuance.
from the Fifth District Court, parish of Orleans. Cullom, J.
It. King Cutler, for plaintiff and appellant. J. M. Harding, for defendants and appellees.

Opinion:
On Motion to Dismiss.
Wtlt, J.
The transcript of this appeal was 'filed on the seventh November, 1874. On the eleventh the defendants, appellees herein, filed an answer praying for an amendment of the judgment. On the fourteenth they moved to dismiss the appeal because the appeal bond was not for a sufficient amount, because the transcript was not filed in time, and because the clerk certifying the record omitted to affix his signature.
The motion comes too late. Besides having joined in the appeal the appellants ought not to be heard asking its dismissal.
The certificate appended to the record, however, should be signed by the clerk. Of our own motion, it is ordered that the clerk of the Fifth District Court, Thomas Duffe, 'affix his signature to the certificate appended to the record. And the motion of appellees is denied.