Sample v. Sample
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., November 16, 1982 423 So. 2d 106
Sample v. Sample, 432 So. 2d 376 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983).
Cited by
- David Joseph Main Versus Dena Bach Main La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2020
- Buffinet v. Plaquemines Parish Com'n 645 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
- Walker v. Thap 637 So. 2d 1150 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
- Zatzkis v. Zatzkis 632 So. 2d 307 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
- Jessen v. Dr. Kenneth W. Wimberly, DDS 610 So. 2d 252 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
- Pension Inv. Corp. v. East Baton Rouge 583 So. 2d 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
- Howard v. Howard 580 So. 2d 696 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
- Rogers v. Parish of East Baton Rouge 577 So. 2d 1068 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
- Harvey v. Ouachita Parish School Bd. 545 So. 2d 1241 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
- Thornton v. Department of Public Safety 536 So. 2d 595 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
- Overmier v. Traylor 484 So. 2d 676 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
- American Supply Co. of Morgan City, Inc. v. Tara Alyene, Inc. 470 So. 2d 459 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Sample v. Sample 423 So. 2d 106
- Mauboules v. Broussard Rice Mills 379 So. 2d 1196
- Mauboules v. Broussard Rice Mills 381 So. 2d 1234
- Salmon v. Hodges 398 So. 2d 548
Opinion text
432 So.2d 376 (1983) Barbara Suzanne SAMPLE v. John Henry SAMPLE. No. 82 CA 0468. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit. May 17, 1983. Alan S. Fishbein, Baton Rouge, for plaintiff-appellee. G. Thomas Arbour, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant John Henry Sample. Before PONDER, SAVOIE and CRAIN, JJ. CRAIN, Judge. This is an appeal from the judgment of the Family Court of East Baton Rouge denying defendant's motion to have an injunction declared terminated. Previously, we ruled that the parties both stipulated to mutual injunctions prohibiting them from alienating or encumbering any community property prior to voluntary settlement or judicial partition of the property, and that, until such conditions occurred, the injunctions were not appealable. Sample v. Sample, 423 So.2d 106 , (La. App. 1st Cir.1982). However, we found that the other provisions of the trial court's *377 judgment were appealable so we refused to dismiss the appeal. Since our ruling, appellant has not specified any additional error. Consequently, there is nothing for us to review except the refusal to terminate the injunction. La.C.C.P. Art. 2085; Uniform Rules-Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-12.4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The remaining question is appellee's answer to this appeal alleging it is frivolous. La.C.C.P. Art. 2164 allows damages and attorney's fees in cases of frivolous appeals. Where contentions on appeal are without merit, but raise legitimate issues, damages for frivolous appeals are not allowed. Mauboules v. Broussard Rice Mills, 379 So.2d 1196 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1980), writ denied at 381 So.2d 1234 (La.1980). Damages will lie when it is manifest that the appeal was taken solely for the purpose of delay or when it is evident that appellant's counsel is not serious in advocating the view of law which he presents. Salmon v. Hodges, 398 So.2d 548 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1979). In the instant case, although appellant's position is without merit, counsel for appellant raised legitimate questions and seriously advocated his view. Therefore, damages for frivolous appeal will not issue. For the reasons assigned, the appeal is dismissed and damages for frivolous appeal are denied. Costs are to be paid by appellant. APPEAL DISMISSED.