Hodges v. Oddo
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 3d Cir., July 30, 1975 317 So. 2d 4; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., July 5, 1972 264 So. 2d 661; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., November 15, 1960 124 So. 2d 588; La., May 15, 1874 26 La. Ann. 383
Hodges v. Oddo, 8 Teiss. 61 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1910).
Opinion text
GODCHAUX, J. Plaintiff sued for the sum of one hundred and thirty-five and 80/100 dollars ($135.80) and defendant answered confessing liability for one hundred and twenty-four and 7/100 dollars ($124.07), but denying liability for the balance of the claim, namely eleven dollars and seventy-three cents ($11.73). Prom a judgment against defendant for the amount confessed by him to be due, the plaintiff appeals, and defendant has moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the amount in dispute is below that prescribed for our appellate jurisdiction. It is clear that by defendant’s confession in its answer as well as by the judgment itself the amount in dispute was reduced to a sum less than one hundred dollars and that consequently this Court is without jurisdiction on the appeal. Borde vs. Lazarus, Michel & Lazarus, 7 Court of Appeal. Affirmed on writ to the Supreme Court. In re Lazarus, Michel & Lazarus, No. 18,325 of docket. *62 November 21, 1910. Tlie appeal must consequently be dismissed and it is; so ordered.