10 La. 398
Decided October 15, 1836
Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1836-10-15
Westf.uk Dist. AITEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. moved to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that there was no service of the petition of appeal accompanying the citation. This was a fatal defect, which authorized the dismissal of the appeal. 7 Louisiana Reports, 361. moved for time to have the sheriff’s return amended; he expected the service had been properly made, but omitted in the return.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1927
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1836-10-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1delivered the opinion of the court.
¶2The dismissal of the appeal is prayed for, in this case, on the ground that there was no service of the petition of appeal. Service of the petition, as well as citation of appeal, is required by law. This case cannot be distinguished from that of Taliaferro vs. King’s heirs, 7 Louisiana Reports, 361.
¶3It is, therefore, ordered, that the appeal be dismissed, with costs.