delivered the opinion of the court. The plaintiff and appellee prays that the appeal be dismissed, on the ground of its having been granted, before the judgment ap*90pealed from, had become complete by the signature of the judge. This appears to be the fact.

The counsel refers us to Turpin vs. his creditors, 9 Martin, 518; Shaumburg vs. Torry & al. syndics; 10 Martin, 179; Fortin vs. Randolph, 11 Martin, 275.

The appeal granted on the 15th, was of a judgment signed on the 19th of February last. It was clearly premature.

It is therefore ordered, that the appeal be be dismissed.