LaCour v. LaCour
Joseph Reed LaCOUR v. Carolyn Anita LaCOUR
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
MOTION TO DISMISS KING, Judge.
On April 1, 1985, the plaintiff-appellee, Joseph Reed LaCour, filed suit for legal separation and child custody against the defendant-appellant, Carolyn Anita LaC-our. Subsequently, the parties reconciled and lived together until June 8, 1985 when the defendant is alleged to have abandoned the plaintiff. On November 10, 1985, the plaintiff filed a First Supplemental and Amended Petition to include abandonment as a ground for legal separation. In response, the defendant filed an Exception of No Cause of Action and Plea of Reconciliation and Condonation.
On July 10, 1985, the trial court rendered a judgment denying defendant’s exceptions. The defendant filed for and was granted a devolutive appeal of the July 10, 1985 judgment.
This Court ex proprio motu issued a rule to show cause why the appeal of the defendant should not be dismissed on the ground that the judgment appealed from is a nonappealable interlocutory judgment. The defendant did not answer the rule.
A judgment which dismisses or denies a peremptory exception of no right or cause of action is an interlocutory judgment and is unappealable. Millet v. Johnson, 352 So.2d 1301 (La.App. 4th Cir.1977).
*778 Therefore, we find the judgment appealed from is a nonappealable interlocutory judgment. Accordingly, the defendant’s appeal is dismissed at defendant’s cost.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.