From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ross v. Hatchette

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Apr 23, 1971
247 So. 2d 399 (La. Ct. App. 1971)

Summary

In Ross v. Hatchette, 247 So.2d 399 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1971), we refused to remand the case to enable the defendants-appellees to traverse plaintiff's right to proceed in forma pauperis, because we felt that defendants had had an adequate opportunity to traverse in the trial court.

Summary of this case from Darby v. Travelers Insurance Company

Opinion

No. 3509.

April 23, 1971.

APPEAL FROM FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF CALCASIEU, CECIL C. CUTRER, J.

W. Monroe Stephenson, New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellant.

Hall, Raggio, Farrar Barnett, Lake Charles, for defendants-appellees.

Before SAVOY, HOOD and CULPEPPER, JJ.


On Motion to Remand


The defendants-appellees have filed a motion to remand the instant case to the district court for the purpose of traversing the order of the district judge allowing plaintiff-appellant to prosecute this action without payment of costs or the giving of any bond for costs.

By order of court dated December 10, 1962, plaintiff was allowed to file the instant suit in forma pauperis. On January 25, 1971, written reasons for judgment were assigned; and on February 16, 1971, formal judgment was signed. On February 23, 1971, an order was signed by the district judge allowing plaintiff to appeal this case. Nothing is mentioned in the order about the furnishing of a bond.

In Oldham v. Hoover, 140 So.2d 417 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1962), the court said:

"Our courts have held that where a devolutive appeal is taken in forma pauperis without allowing the appellee sufficient time in which to traverse the affidavits of poverty, the appellate court may, upon timely application therefor, remand the cause to give the appellee the opportunity to do so. See Brewer v. Theole, 186 La. 168, 171 So. 839; Buckley v. Thibodeaux, 181 La. 416, 159 So. 603." (Emphasis added.)

In the instant case appellees have had from December 10, 1962, to February 16, 1971, during which to traverse the affidavits in the district court.

We are of the opinion that it would be inequitable to allow defendants to traverse at this late date in view of the length of time they have had to traverse.

For the reasons assigned the motion to remand is denied.

Motion denied.


Summaries of

Ross v. Hatchette

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Apr 23, 1971
247 So. 2d 399 (La. Ct. App. 1971)

In Ross v. Hatchette, 247 So.2d 399 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1971), we refused to remand the case to enable the defendants-appellees to traverse plaintiff's right to proceed in forma pauperis, because we felt that defendants had had an adequate opportunity to traverse in the trial court.

Summary of this case from Darby v. Travelers Insurance Company
Case details for

Ross v. Hatchette

Case Details

Full title:Elliot Ray ROSS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dr. Charles V. HATCHETTE et al.…

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit

Date published: Apr 23, 1971

Citations

247 So. 2d 399 (La. Ct. App. 1971)

Citing Cases

White v. Radford Buick, Inc.

Under the facts of this case, the appellee has had no opportunity to traverse in the district court, and thus…

Smith v. H. J. Landreneau Bldg. Contrac

Under the facts of this case, the mover has had insufficient opportunity to traverse in the district court,…