Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Favrot v. Favrot, 210 So. 2d 316.

25 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
579, 588, (1970); (1968)).
State of Louisiana and the Vermilion Parish School Board v. Louisiana Land & Exploration Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
579, 588, (1970); (1968)).
Prcp-Ns New Orleans, LLC D/B/A Esplanade at City Park v. Anne Swanson La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
579, 588, 4 (1970); (1968)).
Williams v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. No.1 of Tangipahoa Parish 258 So. 3d 584 La. 2018
579 , (1970) ; , (1968) ; Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. Campbell, 250 La.
Fraternal Order of Police v. New Orleans 831 So. 2d 897 La. 2002
579 , (1970); , (1968); Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. Campbell, 250 La.
Shell Pipeline Corp. v. Kennedy 799 So. 2d 475 La. 2001
579 , (1970); , (1968); Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. Campbell, 250 La.
Martin v. G & A Ltd. 583 So. 2d 611 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
4th Cir.1969); , (1968).
Harris v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 485 So. 2d 965 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
Jeanmard v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. 436 So. 2d 575 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
579 , (1970); , (1968); Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. Campbell, 250 La.
US Fire Ins. Co. v. Swann 424 So. 2d 240 La. 1982
579 , (1970); , (1968); Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. Campbell, 250 La.
Miller v. Miller 405 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Plaquemines Materials, Inc. v. Bess 364 So. 2d 577 La. 1978
Because of the strong policy of the law favoring the maintenance of appeals unless a legal ground for dismissal is clearly shown, , (1968), and since the object of security for payment of costs is the timely payment of costs, the payment of estimated costs within the delay for taking a devolutive appeal is equivalent to a timely furnishing of security.
Davidge v. Magliola 346 So. 2d 177 La. 1977
Boyle v. Daigrepont 320 So. 2d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
With respect to appellee’s first ground for dismissal, , .
McMillan v. Chauvin 281 So. 2d 181 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1973
Because appeals are favored and "should be maintained unless a legal ground for dismissal is clearly shown", , (1968), I would deny the motion to dismiss.
Palmer v. Trestman 282 So. 2d 558 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
(1968), denying as untimely within C.C.P.
David v. Department of Public Safety 261 So. 2d 347 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
In re Investigation of Possible Violation of the Civil Service Law & Rules by Roberts 257 So. 2d 473 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Borenstein v. Joseph Fein Caterers, Inc. 240 So. 2d 584 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
We also note that appeals are favored in law and should not be dismissed except on clear legal ground, , (1968).
Gremillion v. Rinaudo 240 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
However, , , expressly holds that once the appeal bond is timely filed, jurisdiction attaches in the appellate court.
Louisiana Power & Light Company v. Lasseigne 232 So. 2d 278 La. 1970
6 , , this court recognized that appellant’s refusal to pay for the transcript of testimony as ordered by the trial judge was imputable to the appellant; however, the motion to dismiss the appeal was not timely filed in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure Article 2126.
Succession of Videau 228 So. 2d 352 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
All other questions as to the content and form of the record shall be presented to the appellate court.” , (1968), the Supreme Court held “This Article clearly contemplates material omissions from the record on appeal and provides a method of correction.
Smith v. Jung Hotel Corp. 218 So. 2d 922 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
art. 5185; and since appeals are favored in law and should not be dismissed except on clear legal ground, , (1968); we believe we should follow our decision in Lerner v. Bischof, supra, and we will therefore afford to appellant seven days, exclusive of Sundays and holidays, from the date of this opinion, within which to obtain from the trial court an order amending the order of appeal to specify, nunc pro tu
Guilbeau v. Jeanerette Lumber & Shingle Co. 214 So. 2d 392 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Favrot v. Favrot 219 So. 2d 594 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
See Favrot v. Favrot, La.App., and La., .