State v. Cole
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., May 22, 1961 130 So. 2d 671; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., January 23, 1961 126 So. 2d 711; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., July 1, 1884 2 McGl. 132; La., July 15, 1871 23 La. Ann. 571
State v. Cole, 39 La. Ann. 938 (1887).
Cited by
- Shreveport Grocery Co. v. Johnson 121 So. 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
Opinion text
The opinion of the Court was delivered by Bermudez, C. J. The appearance bond furnished by the defendant, was declared forfeited and judgment rendered, on his failure to appear when summoned. The surety thereupon took a rule to have the forfeiture set aside and the bond annulled, alleging various grounds in support. The district judge, after hearing, merely rescinded the judgment. From this decree, the State appeals. The appellee moves to dismiss on the ground that an appeal does not lie therefrom. It is evident that the district judge did not pass upon the validity of the bond assailed by the security. His action in annulling the forfeiture leaves matters iu the condition in which they stood previous to the motion of the district attorney for the forfeiture of the bond. The right of the State to further proceedings is admitted by the security and remains unaffected. Theoretically and practically the distriet judge, after reversing and setting aside his judgment, has simply granted a new trial. It has been repeatedly held that an appeal does not lie from an order granting a new trial. The motion to dismiss must prevail. Appeal dismissed.