From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dantagnan v. Mancuso

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit
Oct 6, 1972
267 So. 2d 732 (La. Ct. App. 1972)

Opinion

No. 5219.

October 6, 1972.

APPEAL FROM CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS, DIVISION "F", NO. 474-710, HENRY J. ROBERTS, JR., J.

Badeaux Discon, Reginald T. Badeaux, Jr., J. Michael Cumberland, New Orleans, for Frank Mancuso, defendants-appellees.

Plotkin Bradley, Steven R. Plotkin, New Orleans, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Before CHASEZ, REDMANN, and LEMMON, JJ.


ON MOTION TO DISMISS


On motion of defendant Mancuso (and on our own motion as to the remaining defendant) this appeal is dismissed in its entirety as untimely. Judgment was rendered and notice sent June 22, 1971; motion for new trial filed July 2 was untimely, C.C.P. art. 1974, and therefore the 90 day delay for devolutive appeal ran from expiration of the delay for applying for a new trial, C.C.P. art. 2087 subd. (1). Accordingly the petition and order of appeal of December 8, 1971 came too late since the judgment had become definitive, C.C.P. art. 1842 and CC. art. 3556, subd. 31.

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Dantagnan v. Mancuso

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit
Oct 6, 1972
267 So. 2d 732 (La. Ct. App. 1972)
Case details for

Dantagnan v. Mancuso

Case Details

Full title:Norman DANTAGNAN and Mrs. Lena Dantagnan v. Frank MANCUSO et al

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Oct 6, 1972

Citations

267 So. 2d 732 (La. Ct. App. 1972)

Citing Cases

Reeves v. Reeves

"An application for a new trial does not affect, interrupt or extend the delay allowed for taking an appeal…

Brown v. Theriot

An application for a new trial does not affect, interrupt or extend the delay allowed for taking an appeal…