No. 6497 Precedential Dismissed Processed

In re Carter

Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit · Filed February 8, 1978 · 357 So. 2d 1175

Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., December 21, 1965 181 So. 2d 444; La. Ct. App. 5th Cir., November 8, 1915 13 Tiess. 148; La., March 15, 1882 34 La. 204; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., November 7, 1974 303 So. 2d 217

Cited by

In Re Succession of Horrell 993 So. 2d 354 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
Smith v. Smith 796 So. 2d 726 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
Taylor v. Johnson 532 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Sampson 498 So. 2d 1145 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Goins v. Goins 437 So. 2d 947 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
Le Blanc v. Le Blanc 404 So. 2d 530 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
City of Monroe v. Evans 385 So. 2d 912 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
In re Carter 358 So. 2d 949 La. 1978
In re Carter 358 So. 2d 949 La. 1978

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

Pasternack v. Lubritz 280 So. 2d 352

Opinion text

DOMENGEAUX, Judge. MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL This is an appeal from a judgment which found appellant, Mr. Carter, in direct contempt of court as set forth in LSA-C.C.P. art. 222(1). We issued, ex proprio motu, a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed in that a contempt judgment is not a judgment from which an appeal may be taken. The appellant has timely responded to the rule. We dismiss the appeal. *1176 As stated by this court in Pasternack v. Lubritz, 280 So.2d 352 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1973), “[o]ur jurisprudence is established that a judgment holding one party in a lawsuit in contempt of court is not a judgment from which an appeal may be taken. A litigant’s remedy in such a case is to apply to this Court for supervisory writs.” (citations omitted). For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed. All costs of the appeal are assessed to appellant. APPEAL DISMISSED.