From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cloud v. Bushnell

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Oct 21, 1964
168 So. 2d 274 (La. Ct. App. 1964)

Summary

In Cloud v. Bushnell, La. App., 168 So.2d 274, we denied the present intervenor's application to our supervisory jurisdiction seeking to dissolve a preliminary injunction of July 22, 1964, and seeking to review the trial court's refusal on August 17th of the intervenor's motion to dissolve this preliminary injunction; our denial of supervisory writs was based upon the failure of the intervenor to apply for them until after expiration of the appellate delays allowed for review of such matters.

Summary of this case from Cloud v. Dyess

Opinion

No. 1313.

October 21, 1964.

APPEAL FROM NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF RAPIDES, WALTER M. HUNTER, J.

William Ray Bradford, Jr., Alexandria, for plaintiff-relator.

Gravel, Sheffield D'Angelo by A. M. D'Angelo, Alexandria, John R. Hunter, Jr., Alexandria, for defendant-respondent.

En Banc.


This is an application to our supervisory jurisdiction praying for rescission and annulment of an interlocutory preliminary injunction granted by the trial court.

The relator had unsuccessfully attempted to intervene in the injunction suit. Following the granting of the preliminary injunction, the relator had intervened in the suit as an interested party, and had then unsuccessfully moved to dissolve the injunction.

Relator or no other party sought to appeal within the fifteen-day delay applicable to orders or judgments relating to interlocutory preliminary injunctions, LSA-C.C.P. Art. 3612. Neither the granting of the preliminary injunction, nor the refusal to dissolve it, are now reviewable by appellate process.

An application for supervisory relief will be denied when the relator has failed to seek appropriate relief by available appellate procedures within the time allowed by law, but thereafter attempts to secure such relief via the supervisory jurisdiction. Borah v. Dussel, 153 La. 54, 95 So. 399. Cf. also: Warren v. Malvina Realty Co., 178 La. 495, 151 So. 906; State ex rel. Duhe v. Judge, 41 La. Ann. 1140, 6 So. 797.

The application for supervisory writs is therefore denied.

Application for supervisory writs denied.


Summaries of

Cloud v. Bushnell

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Oct 21, 1964
168 So. 2d 274 (La. Ct. App. 1964)

In Cloud v. Bushnell, La. App., 168 So.2d 274, we denied the present intervenor's application to our supervisory jurisdiction seeking to dissolve a preliminary injunction of July 22, 1964, and seeking to review the trial court's refusal on August 17th of the intervenor's motion to dissolve this preliminary injunction; our denial of supervisory writs was based upon the failure of the intervenor to apply for them until after expiration of the appellate delays allowed for review of such matters.

Summary of this case from Cloud v. Dyess
Case details for

Cloud v. Bushnell

Case Details

Full title:Robert CLOUD, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. C. L. BUSHNELL, Registrar, etc.…

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit

Date published: Oct 21, 1964

Citations

168 So. 2d 274 (La. Ct. App. 1964)

Citing Cases

Triche v. City of Houma

Relators then filed this application in this Court on January 27, 1977. In their brief in opposition to this…

State v. Signal

Not considered. Because the appellate delays have expired, La.C.Cr.P. art. 914, we will not exercise our…