Case Name: STATE ex rel. HODGE, Dist. Atty., v. OLIVER, Sheriff and Tax Collector
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1918-04-01
Citations: 143 La. 180
Docket Number: No. 21215
Parties: STATE ex rel. HODGE, Dist. Atty., v. OLIVER, Sheriff and Tax Collector.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 143
Pages: 180–181

Head Matter:
(78 South. 439)
No. 21215.
STATE ex rel. HODGE, Dist. Atty., v. OLIVER, Sheriff and Tax Collector.
(April 1, 1918.)
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal and Ekror &wkey;>123 — Decisions Reviewable — Appellate Jurisdiction — Dismissal.
Where the transcript discloses a verdict but no judgment pursuant thereto, either rendered or signed, no appeal lies; the appellate jurisdiction of this court does not attach; and an attempted appeal will be dismissed.
Appeal from Seventh Judicial District Court, Parish of Richland; J. R. McIntosh, Judge.
Suit by the State, on relation of Tobin R. Hodge, District Attorney of Richland parish, against William T. Oliver, Sheriff and Tax Collector. Prom a verdict for defendant, relator appeals.
Appeal dismissed.
Tobin R. Hodge, Dist. Atty., of Rayville, in pro. per. Hudson, Potts, Bernstein & Scholars, of Monroe, for appellee.

Opinion:
On Motion to Dismiss Appeal.
MONROE, C. J.
This suit was brought by the district attorney of Richland parish for the removal of the sheriff of that parish.
The transcript of appeal, filed in this court on March 15, 1915, discloses a verdict, reading:
"We, the jury, find the defendant, W. T. Oliver, guilty of nonfeasance, but not to the extent to justify Ms impeachment or removal from office of sheriff of Richland parish."
The transcript does not disclose any judgment, rendered upon the verdict, nor motion, nor order, nor bond, of appeal; nor the name of the presiding judge.
Counsel appearing for defendant move that the appeal be dismissed on the ground "that there is no judgment in the case from which an appeal can, or could be, taken, none such at the time the appeal herein was taken, none ever having been signed and entered by the presiding judge of the court a qua, and that therefore this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal."
The motion is well founded. C. P. 541, 565; Railroad Co. v. Construction Co., 118 La. 409, 37 South. 10; Hauch v. Drew, 116 La. 4S8, 40 South. 847; Mitchell v. Creosoting Co., 123 La. 957, 49 South. 655; Hanchey v. Railroad Co., 135 La. 352, 65 South. 487.
The appeal herein is therefore dismissed.