357 SO2D 1175 - In re Carter

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently October 2008

8 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

DOMENGEAUX, Judge.

¶1MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

¶2This is an appeal from a judgment which found appellant, Mr. Carter, in direct contempt of court as set forth in LSA-C.C.P. art. 222(1). We issued, ex proprio motu, a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed in that a contempt judgment is not a judgment from which an appeal may be taken. The appellant has timely responded to the rule.

¶3We dismiss the appeal.

¶4 *1176As stated by this court in Pasternack v. Lubritz, 280 So.2d 352 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1973), “[o]ur jurisprudence is established that a judgment holding one party in a lawsuit in contempt of court is not a judgment from which an appeal may be taken. A litigant’s remedy in such a case is to apply to this Court for supervisory writs.” (citations omitted).

¶5For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed. All costs of the appeal are assessed to appellant.

¶6APPEAL DISMISSED.