Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Teiss. 60

Lindner v. Martinez

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 14, 1904

Louisiana Court of Appeal · decided 1904-11-14

” ON Motion to Dismiss. Where the motion and order of appeal is from the .“Judgment rendered,” an averment in the motion for appeal that the error consists of the ‘fact that the costs have been improperly adjudged against the litigant moving the appeal, cannot be construed as intending an appeal solely from so much of the judgment as concerns the costs and therefore unappealable separately from the other matters concerned by the judgment.

Decided 1904-11-14

MOORE, J.

¶1Appellee seeks the dismissal of this appeal on the ground that the judgment rendered in this cause is not ap^-pc-aled from-, -but that the appeal is only from so much of the judgment as concerns the defendant, who is the appellant here, to pay the -costs, which portion of the judlgment it is contended, may net be separately appealed from.

¶2We do not so understand either the motion of appeal or the order thereon.

¶3The former specifically states “That defendant desires to sus-pensively appeal from said judgment;” the date of the rendition and signing being given; and the latter orders a suspensive appeal *61from said judgment, fixing tbe-amount of the appeal bond in an amount sufficient to bring up tihe whole case for review.

November 14th, 1904.

¶4The motion for appeal, it is true, avers that the error in the judgment consists in the fact that the defendant was condemned to pay the costs. This averment, however, is to 'be construed rather as an assignment of errors -than as limiting the appeal to a portion of the judgment only.

¶5The motion to dismiss is denied.

/2/teiss/60 · .json · Public domain