Abernathy v. Stanley A. Lafargue & Associates, Inc.
Abernathy v. Stanley A. Lafargue & Associates, Inc., 382 So. 2d 1002 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980).
The holding in the court’s own words
Thus we conclude that since plaintiff-appellant did not obtain an order of appeal within the time allowed, this court is without jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Cited by
- First National Bank of Commerce v. Bernard 398 So. 2d 1293 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
- Traigle v. Gulf Coast Aluminum Corp. 391 So. 2d 1290 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Willie v. Otasco 347 So. 2d 1215
Opinion text
ON MOTION TO DISMISS LOTTINGER, Judge. Defendant-appellee has moved this court to dismiss the appeal of plaintiff as not being timely. Judgment was rendered on May 25, 1979, and read and signed on May 31, 1979. Notice of the judgment was mailed the same day. A new trial was not applied for, thus the appeal period commenced to run on June 12, 1979, and ended on August 10, 1979. La.C.C.P. arts. 1974 and 2087. *1003 The motion for appeal was filed with the clerk of the trial court on August 10, 1979; however, it was not signed until August 13, 1979. La.C.C.P. art. 2121 is clear when it in part says, “[a]n appeal, is' taken by obtaining an order therefor, within the delay allowed, from the court which rendered the judgment.” (Emphasis supplied). Willie v. Otasco, 347 So.2d 1215 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1977). The timeliness of an appeal order is jurisdictional. Thus we conclude that since plaintiff-appellant did not obtain an order of appeal within the time allowed, this court is without jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed. Therefore, for the above and foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed at appellant’s costs. APPEAL DISMISSED.