Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

168 So. 2d 274

Cloud v. Bushnell

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided October 21, 1964

Louisiana Court of Appeal · decided 1964-10-21

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 1977

5 state decisions

Relies on Borah v. Dussel · Warren v. Malvina Realty Co. · State ex rel. Duhé v. Rost

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1964-10-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1This is an application to our supervisory jurisdiction praying for rescission and annulment of an interlocutory preliminary injunction granted by the trial court.

¶2The 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.

¶3Relator 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.

¶4An 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.

¶5The application for supervisory writs is therefore denied.

¶6Application for supervisory writs denied..

/168/so2d/274 · .json · Public domain