Pray v. First Nat. Bank of Jefferson Parish
Pray v. First Nat. Bank of Jefferson Parish, 634 So. 2d 1163 (La. 1994).
Cited by
- Willie Covington and April Covington v. Clark Sand Co., Inc.; Clemco Industries Corporation f/k/a … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
- In Re: Medical Review Panel Proceedings of Don Singleton La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
- Bryan Arnold Richman, Jr. v. the Travelers Indemnity Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
- Bridlington Co. v. Southern Disposal Services, L.L.C. 216 So. 3d 219 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
- Joseph v. Wasserman 194 So. 3d 720 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
- Edward Perkins v. Roy O. Martin Lumber Co., LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
- Perkins v. Roy O. Martin Lumber Co. 189 So. 3d 531 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
- Johnson v. University Medical Center 109 So. 3d 347 La. 2013
- Lela Johnson v. University Medical Center in Lafayette La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
- Johnson v. University Medical Center in Lafayette 104 So. 3d 726 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
- Johnnie M. Lefear v. Herbert Paul Simons La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
- Peacock v. Peacock 903 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
Opinion text
634 So.2d 1163 (1994) Horace Clint PRAY and Superport Marketing Corporation v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF JEFFERSON PARISH. No. 93-CC-3027. Supreme Court of Louisiana. February 11, 1994. PER CURIAM. Granted. The primary purpose of La.Code Civ.Proc. art. 2126's authorization to dismiss appeals for non-payment of costs is to dismiss the appeal as abandoned, in those cases in which the appellant files a timely appeal and thereafter decides not to pursue it. A secondary purpose is to ensure prompt payment of costs of appeal by dilatory appellants. The focus of district courts in deciding Article 2126 motions to dismiss should be on securing payment of costs in order to move appeals forward rather than on dismissing appeals, although obviously not abandoned, simply because a motion was filed (as in this case) immediately after expiration of the twenty-day period for paying the costs. The district court abused its discretion in this case by immediately dismissing the appeal, which the appellant clearly had not abandoned, without affording the appellant a brief extension of time for payment of costs. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court dismissing the appeal is reversed, and the appeal is reinstated on the condition that the appellant pay the estimated costs within twenty days of this order. If the appellant fails to do so, the district court, upon appropriate motion, shall dismiss the appeal.