text:
    Sharon DAILEY v. Helen TRAVIS, in Her Capacity as Assistant Warden of Louisiana Correctional Institute for Women, et al.
    No. 2003-CC-1027.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re Travis, Helen Asst. Wdn.; Jones, Johnnie; Robinson, Inez; Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberville, 18th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 55,628; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CW 2051.

Granted. Remanded to court of appeal for briefing, argument, and opinion.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    C.T. TRAINA, INC. v. SUNSHINE PLAZA, INC.
    No. 2003-C-1003.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re C.T. Traína, Inc.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 97-14806; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2001 CA 2923.

Granted.


text:
    Raleigh LANDRY and Clailee Aucoin Landry v. AVONDALE INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.
    No. 2003-CC-1002.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re McDermott Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. H, No. 02-5103; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-C-2373.

Granted. Consolidated with 2003-CC-0719 and 2003-CC-0993.


text:
    Raleigh LANDRY and Clailee Aucoin Landry v. AVONDALE INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.
    No. 2003-CC-0993.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re Reilly-Benton Company Inc.; Liberty Mutual Insurance Company; — Defendants); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. H, No. 02-5103; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-C-2372.

Granted. Consolidated with 2003-CC-0719 and 2003-CC-1002.


text:
    Byron Ellis TALBOT v. Bernice Ellen Harang TALBOT.
    No. 2003-C-0814.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re Talbot, Bernice Ellen Harang;— Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 81740; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2000 CA 2650.

Granted. Briefing and argument are especially invited regarding assignment of error number 1.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    Raleigh LANDRY and Clailee Aucoin Landry v. AVONDALE INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.
    No. 2003-CC-0719.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re Territo, Peter; Blanchard, Edward; Garrett, J. Melton; Bossier, Albert Jr.; Commercial Union Insurance Company; Daigle, Addison; Naquin, Francis C.; Bailey, H. W.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. H, No. 02-5103; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-C-2341.

Granted. Consolidated with 2003-CC-0993 and 2003-CC-1002.


text:
    Edmond BREAUX and Mary Breaux, Individually and as Parent of Their Minor Child, Aaron Breaux v. Joseph F. CERNIGLIA, Marilyn McKinney, and First Financial Insurance Company.
    No. 2003-CC-1135.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re Cerniglia, Joseph F. et al.; McKinney, Marilyn; First Financial Insurance Company; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, Nos. 562-771, 563-231; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 03-C-254.

Denied.


text:
    Natalie S. COLVIN, Individually and on Behalf of Her Deceased Husband, Henry H. Colvin, and on Behalf of Her Minor Child, Heather Lynn Colvin, Individually, and on Behalf of Her Deceased Father, Henry H. Colvin v. MEDICAL CENTER OF BATON ROUGE HOSPITAL, a/k/a Medical Center Hospital and Patricio Mujica, M.D.
    No. 2003-C-1141.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re Mujica, Patricio M.D.; Louisiana Patient’s Compensation Fund; — Defendants); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 313,284; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0605.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Noretta THOMAS and Demetrice Butler, Each Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. A. WILBERT & SONS, INC., L.L.C. and XYZ Insurance Company. Troy Robichaux, Shannon Robichaux, Michael J. Tuminello, Sr. and Olive D. Tuminello v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Health and Hospitals and through the Department of Environmental Quality and Dow Chemical Company.
    No. 2003-CC-1088.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 20, 2003.
   In re Dow Chemical Co.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberville, 18th Judicial District Court Div. B, Nos. 55,127, 56,803; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CW 2197.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Lawrence ROBERTSON.
    No. 2003-KK-1565.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 25, 2003.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, No. 409-923; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2003-K-0116.

Not considered. Not timely filed. See Supreme Court Rule X, Section 5.


text:
    A.C. COPELAND v. Luan Hunter COPELAND.
    No. 2003-CC-1784.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 25, 2003.
   In re Copeland, A.C.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 547-189; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 03-C-626.

Denied.


text:
    Mona Hall Hagan CAUTHEN v. Robert Gene HAGAN.
    No. 2003-C-1730.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 25, 2003.
   In re Hagan, Robert Gene; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Vernon, 30th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 54,551; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1274.

_ . , Demed.


text:
    Eddie BENOIT, Jr., Eddie Benoit, Sr. and Marge Benoit v. Davey BICKFORD, SNC.
    No. 2003-CC-1568.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 25, 2003.
   In re Bickford, Davey SNC; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 546-607; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 03-C-640.

Denied.


text:
    Emily Abel WAGNER v. The BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Robert Matthews, and Irving Land.
    No. 2003-CC-1253.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 25, 2003.
   In re Wagner, Emily Abel; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 491,599; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CW 2633.

Denied.


text:
    CITY OF NEW ORLEANS’ DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE in Its Capacity as the Orleans Parish Tax Collector v. NEW ORLEANS PADDLEWHEELS, INC., and Warren L. Reuther, Jr., Nancy M. Reuther, Duane P. Smith, James E. Smith, Jr., James E. Smith, Sr., et al.
    No. 2003-CC-1761.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 25, 2003.
   In re New Orleans City of Finance Department et al; Orleans Parish Tax Collector; — Plaintiffs); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2003-5903; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No(s). 2003-C-0926, 2003-C-0937.

Denied.


text:
    CITY OF NEW ORLEANS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE in Its Capacity as the Orleans Parish Tax Collector v. NEW ORLEANS PADDLEWHEELS, INC., and Warren L. Reuther, Jr., Nancy M. Reuther, Duane P. Smith, James E. Smith, Jr., James E. Smith, Sr., Craig W. Smith, and Anthony G. Moore, etc.
    No. 2003-CC-1806.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 25, 2003.
   In re New Orleans City of Finance Department et al.; Orleans Parish Tax Collector; — Plaintiffs); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2003-5903; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No(s). 2003-C-1048, 2003-C-0937.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jason REEVES.
    No. 2003-KK-1602.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Reeves, Jason; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. E, Nos. 201790-01, 20180-01; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No(s). KW 02-1427, KW-03-43.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Reginald Peter FONTANA.
    No. 2002-KO-2072.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Fontana, Reginald Peter; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 00-F0851; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 35,826.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Terry C. PRUDHOMME.
    No. 2002-KO-2073.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Prudhomme, Terry C.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Natchitoches, 10th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 54,365; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 99-2029.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Kevin Dewayne FRAZIER.
    No. 2002-KO-2235.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Frazier, Kevin Dewayne; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Sabine, 11th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 52,155; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-195.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gerard A. KEELEY.
    No. 2002-KO-2243.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Keeley, Gerard A.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 416-205; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2001-KA-1271.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Stephen P. TITZER.
    No. 2002-KO-2304.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Titzer, Stephen P.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 341,591; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No(s). 2001 KA 2869, 2001 KA 2868.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana (City of Shreveport) v. Tobey C. JORDAN.
    No. 2002-K-2362.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Jordan, Tobey C.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, Shreveport City Court, No. 1K073518; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36617-KW.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Anthony HOPSON.
    No. 2002-KO-2373.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Hopson, Anthony; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Franklin, 5th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 99-430F; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,-244-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jerry LEWIS.
    No. 2002-KO-2374.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Lewis, Jerry; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. A, No. 416-829; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-KA-0078.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Rawleigh MILLER.
    No. 2002-KO-2480.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Miller, Rawleigh; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 00F1005; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,-003-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Tyrone DUPLECHE.
    No. 2002-KO-2481.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Dupleche, Tyrone; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 405-314; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-KA-0249.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Derrick COLLINS.
    No. 2002-KO-2490.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Collins, Derrick; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. L, No. 413-528; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2001-KA-1459.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Nathan JONES.
    No. 2002-KO-2518.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Jones, Nathan; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 00-3066; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KA-267.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Darold J. ANDERSON.
    No. 2002-KO-2519.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Anderson, Darold J.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 00-5002; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KA-273.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Byron Rozell NASH.
    No. 2002-KO-2527.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Nash, Byron Rozell; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lincoln, 3rd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 45,328; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,-038-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John Dale ALLEN.
    No. 2002-KO-2997.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Allen, John Dale; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Red River, 39th Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. 87,011; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,-180-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Henry WEBER.
    No. 2003-K-0041.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Weber, Henry; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. C, No. 416-357; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-KA-0618.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Elmo LEE.
    No. 2002-KH-1991.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Lee, Elmo; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 389-779; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-K-0914.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Earl WEAVER.
    No. 2001-KO-0070.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Weaver, Earl; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 395-683; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 99-KA-177.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. McKinley ABRAM.
    No. 2001-KO-1262.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Abram, McKinley; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 385-874; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2000-KA-0413.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Austin DYER.
    No. 2001-KO-1579.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Dyer, Austin; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 98-4147; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 00-KA-1866.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., recused.

CALOGERO, C.J., would grant the writ.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE v. Larry LEGANIA.
    No. 2001-KO-1961.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Legania, Larry; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 404-717; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2000-KA-1129.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Larry M. LEGANIA.
    No. 2001-KO-2090.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Legania, Larry M.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 404-717; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2000-KA-1129.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Devin HILLIARD.
    No. 2002-KO-2638.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Hilliard, Devin; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 416-293; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-KA-0254.

Application dismissed at relator’s request.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John L. BUNIFF.
    No. 2003-K-0298.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Buniff, John; — Defendant;—Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated May 9, 2003; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “N”, No. 99-7414; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KA-0567.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Dale R. MILLER.
    No. 2003-KH-1043.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Miller, Dale R.; — Defendant; Applying for Reconsideration of this Courts order dated May 9, 2003; Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 92141; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 03-00238.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Craig WILSON.
    No. 2001-K-2300.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Craig Wilson, applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s Order dated September 13, 2002; Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court, Div. E, No. 97-CRI-69944; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2000 KA 2002.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant a reconsideration.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Herbert FOSTER.
    No. 2002-K-0639.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Foster, Herbert; — Defendant, Applying for Rehearing of this Court’s action date November 1, 2002; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. L, No. 388-809; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2001-KA-1663.

Rehearing granted. This case is remanded to the court of appeal for consideration of relator’s remaining assignment of error challenging the excessiveness of his sentence which was pretermitted on original appeal.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jerrod A. WILSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-1631.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Wilson, Jerrod A.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson Davis, 31st Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. CR-1883-96.

Denied. Moot. The court of appeal has acted.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Robert ISADORE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-1635.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Isadore, Robert; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, Crowley City Court, Nos. 19358, 20243, 8746, 8747, 11334, 11335,; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 03-95.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.


text:
    STATE ex rel. William JOHNSON, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-1493.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Johnson Jr., William; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 02-159319; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 KW 2030.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Reginald J. BARNES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1992.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Barnes, Reginald J.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 205,220; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36450-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jerry OSBERRY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1995.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Osberry, Jerry; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 367-651; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-K-0855.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Therman WILLIAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1996.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Williams, Therman; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. O, No. 99-7629; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KH-640.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 980.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Andrew ROBINSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1997.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Robinson, Andrew; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 192,090; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36329-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Dwayne MITCHELL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1998.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Mitchell, Dwayne; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. John, 40th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 94r-19; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KH-549.

Denied. Repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(A).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Andrew PAYNE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-2020.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Payne, Andrew; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 99-2560; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KH-649.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gerald Neal BABINEAUX v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-2021.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Babineaux, Gerald Neal; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Landry, 27th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 98-K-0129; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH-02-00245.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Rontrell WARREN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1937.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Warren, Rontrell; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 392-400; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002 K 836.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gregory WARREN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1942.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Warren, Gregory; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 94 CR3-59663; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2001 KW 894.

Denied. Repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Kernell MONETTE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1944.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Monette, Kernell; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 383-810; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-K-0833.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gary BROOKS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1946.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Brooks, Gary; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Landry, 27th Judicial District Court Div. D, Nos. 96K1940, 97K4880; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH01-01516.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Romell FARLEY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1949.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Farley, Romell; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 385-795; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-K-1117.

Denied. State ex rel. Bernard v. Cr.D.C., 94-2247, p. 1 (La.4/28/95), 653 So.2d 1174, 1175; State ex rel. Fleury v. State, 93-2898 (La.10/13/95), 661 So.2d 488.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Warren PALMER, III v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1950.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Palmer, Warren III; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 241451; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2001 KW 2752.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Bryant MOTT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1954.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Mott, Bryant; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 2-00-407; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002-KW-0307.

Denied. Relator must first seek records from their custodian, R.S. 44:31, and if not satisfied must subsequently seek mandamus relief in the district court. R.S. 44:35.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Steven COOLEY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1955.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Cooley, Steven; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 876-285; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-K-0403.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Beauregard J. WATTINGNEY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1956.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Wattingney, Beauregard; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 98-7344; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KH-528.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Henry MOSES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1972.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Moses, Henry; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 78-2490; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02 KH 630.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Richard LAY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1973.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Lay, Richard; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 215530; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2001 KW 1395.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Damian L. WASHINGTON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1989.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Washington, Damian L.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 383-814; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No(s). 2001-K-2321, 2001-K-1945.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Wesley C. DAVIS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-2118.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Davis, Wesley, C.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 12-93-844; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 KW 257.

Application dismissed at relator’s request.


text:
    STATE ex rel. George E. DUGARS, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1414.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Dugars, George E., Jr. -Plaintiffs); — Applying for Reconsideration of an Order of this Court dated April 25, 2003; Reconsideration of an Order of this Court on April 25, 2003, Fourth Circuit No. 2002-K-333; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court No. 392-445.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Rayvell FINCH v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2002-KH-1563.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Finch, Rayvell; — Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s order dated May 2, 2003, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 390-132; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002 K 323.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Eddie BURKHALTER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-0638.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Burkhalter, Eddie; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of West Feliciana, 20th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 9408.

Granted for the sole purpose of transferring the writ application to the district court with instructions to the district judge to act on relator’s motion to correct an illegal sentence filed via certified mail on June 20, 2002. The district court is ordered to provide this court with a copy of its judgment. A copy of the application is attached.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Walter COLEMAN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-0823.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Coleman, Walter; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 285-548.

Granted for the sole purpose of transferring the writ application to the district court with instructions to the district judge to act on relator’s application for post conviction relief filed via certified mail on January 22, 2003. The district court is ordered to provide this court with a copy of its judgment. A copy of the application is attached.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jorge RODRIGUEZ v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-1036.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Rodriguez, Jorge; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. A, No. 287-297.

Granted for the sole purpose of transferring the writ to the district court with instructions to the district judge to act on relator’s motion to vacate sentence filed on January 2, 2002, as represented by the inmate’s request for legal/indigent mail receipt. The district court is ordered to provide this Court with a copy of its judgment.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Wilson MILES, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-1277.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Miles, Wilson Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, No. 222-493.

Granted for the sole purpose of transferring the application to the district court with instructions to the district judge to act on relator’s application for post-conviction relief filed via certified mail on November 7, 2001. The district court is ordered to provide this court with a copy of its judgment. A copy of the application is attached.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Joseph CAVALIER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-1418.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Cavalier, Joseph; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 277-790.

Relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on an application for post-conviction relief filed on or about August 20, 2001. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the application. If relator’s representation is incorrect, the district court is ordered to accept, file and act upon the pleading which is herewith transferred to the district court. The district court is ordered to provide this court with a copy of its judgment.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Joe Nathan TUBBS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-1446.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Tubbs, Joe Nathan; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. I, Nos. 78,385, 79,613, 79,614.

Relator represents that the district court has filed to act timely on a motion to withdraw guilty plea filed on or about January 10, 2003. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the motion. If relator’s representation is incorrect, the district court is ordered to accept, file and act upon the pleading which is herewith transferred to the district court. The district court is ordered to provide this Court with a copy of its judgment.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Leroy GRIPPEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-0878.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Grippen, Leroy; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 214-495.

Relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on a motion to withdraw guilty plea filed in 2002. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the- motion. If relator’s representation is incorrect, the district court is ordered to accept, file and act upon the pleading which is herewith transferred to the district court. The district court is ordered to provide this Court with a copy of its judgment.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Fleming MORAN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-KH-0802.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Moran, Fleming; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 265,071.

Relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on a motion for production of documents filed on or about November 7, 2002. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the motion. If relator’s representation is incorrect, the district court is ordered to accept, file and act upon the pleading which is herewith transferred to the district court. The district court is ordered to provide this court with a copy of its judgment.


text:
    Casey BILLIESON, et al. v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, et al.
    No. 2003-CC-1466.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re C.J. Brown Public Housing Management Co.; Ventana Property Management, Inc.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. B, No. 94-19231; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2003-C-0402.

Denied.


text:
    Todd JOINER and Carla Joiner v. BILL HOOD FORD, INC.
    No. 2003-C-1231.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In Re Joiner, Todd et al.; Joiner, Carla; — Plaintiffs); Applying for Writ of Cer-tiorari and/or Review, Parish of Tangipa-hoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 2001-002574; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002-CA-0996.

Denied.


text:
    Webster MOORE, et al. v. SAFEWAY INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2003-C-1234.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Safeway Insurance Company of Louisiana; Reeves, Charles; — Defendants); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Vernon, 30th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 62,166; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1384.

Denied.


text:
    Chestee B. ADAMS and Charles P. Adams v. Dr. Michael TEAGUE.
    No. 2003-C-1239.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Teague, Michael Dr.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 455,668; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0645.

Denied.


text:
    BANKERS INSURANCE COMPANY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2003-C-1240.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Bankers Insurance Co.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ' of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 01-2410; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 37,-080-CA.

Denied.


text:
    Rosemary NETTER, et al. v. Calvin MORGAN, et al.
    No. 2003-CC-1225.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Morgan, Calvin; Jowin Express, Inc.; Zurich American Insurance Company; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, Nos. 02-16248, 02-16249, 02-16250; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2003-C-0380.

Denied.


text:
    Mel MCDANIEL v. CARENCRO LIONS CLUB, et al.
    No. 2003-C-1061.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Gullett, John d/b/a; Global Tel-emedia Inc.; J.G. Enterprises Inc.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 97-4017; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1244.

Denied.


text:
    Mel MCDANIEL v. CARENCRO LIONS CLUB, et al.
    No. 2003-C-1065.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 97-4017; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1244.

Denied.


text:
    Mel MCDANIEL v. CARENCRO LIONS CLUB, et al.
    No. 2003-C-1069.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Carenero Lions Club et al.; Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government; Royal Insurance Co. of America;— Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 97-4017; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1244.

Denied.


text:
    Noble Edward ELLINGTON, Jr. v. Peggy Marie McDowell ELLINGTON.
    No. 2003-C-1092.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Traylor, Peggy Marie McDowell Ellington; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Franklin, 5th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 32,560; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,943-CA.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.


text:
    The ESTATE OF Gaston PATOUT and Roy Patout v. The CITY OF NEW IBERIA, Louisiana.
    No. 2003-C-1098.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Century Indemnity Co.; Pacific Employers Ins. Co.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Iberia, 16th Judicial District Court Div. G, Nos. 74,696, 78,778; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-278.

Denied.


text:
    The ESTATE OF Gaston PATOUT and Roy Patout v. The CITY OF NEW IBERIA, Louisiana.
    No. 2003-C-1099.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Twin City Fire Ins. Co.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Iberia, 16th Judicial District Court Div. G, Nos. 74,696, 78,778; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-278.

Denied.


text:
    Stephen A. KLAIMON v. JS INVESTIGATIONS and State Department of Labor, Office of Economic Security.
    No. 2003-C-1110.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Klaimon, Stephen A.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 2000-14852; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2001 CA 2877.

Denied.


text:
    William DECKER v. L.O. ABINGTON.
    No. 2003-C-1112.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Decker, William; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 199,919; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1256.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Raymond BROOKS, Jr. (Sentenced as “Raymond J. Brooks”).
    No. 2003-K-0664.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. P, No. 99-2509; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KA-1051.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Roy FREMIN, Sr., et al. v. CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2003-C-0966.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Fremin, Roy Sr.; Fremin, Bonnie; Morein, Mary Fremin; Pisani, Jacqueline Fremin; Fremin, Donald J.; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Iberia, 16th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 91,617; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1157.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    John B. ROBERTSON v. Mary K. ROBERTSON.
    No. 2003-C-0968.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Robertson, John B.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 88-16189; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2001 CA 2859.

Denied.


text:
    Roy FREMIN, Sr., et al. v. CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2003-C-0979.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Louisiana Patients’ Compensation Fund; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Iberia, 16th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 91,617; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1157.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    Roy FREMIN, Sr., et al. v. CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2003-C-0981.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Continental Insurance Company; Ponder, Jimmy N., M.D.; Headache & Pain Management Center of the South AMC; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Iberia, 16th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 91,617; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 02-1157.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    Boyd ATTERBERRY v. RYDER TRUCK RENTAL SERVICE.
    No. 2002-OC-1516.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Ryder Truck Rental Service;— Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Terre-bonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 124559; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0101.

Denied.


text:
    Lawrence FRANK v. Kent Guidry FARMS.
    No. 2002-C-1608.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Kent Guidry Farms; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation District 03, No. 00-03921; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 01-727.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Harvey WHITE, Jr. v. SHOP RITE.
    No. 2002-C-1266.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Shop Rite; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation District 2, No. 00-6613; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 01-1532.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Joseph GREFER, et al. v. SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2003-CC-1244.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Grefer, Joseph et al.; Grefer, Henry; Hasse, Rose Marie Grefer; Grefer, Camille; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 566-126; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 03-C-259.

Writ denied. Stay denied.


text:
    Kenneth Wayne HUGHES v. Teresa Lynn TALTON.
    No. 2003-C-1487.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Taitón, Teresa Lynn; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 574-394; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 03-CA-12.

Granted. Judgment of district court and court of appeal reversed and remanded to district court for reallotment and motion for new trial granted.


text:
    CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION v. STATE of Louisiana Through the DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND TAXATION and John N. Kennedy, in His Capacity as Secretary of Revenue and Taxation.
    No. 2003-C-1243.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Louisiana State of; Kennedy, John N. Secretary, Dept, of Revenue and Taxation; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 437-135; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0999.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., would grant the writ.

KIMBALL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Clark Charles NASH, IV and Shelly M. Nash v. STATE of Louisiana, Through the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS or Trustees for State Colleges and Universities.
    No. 2003-CC-1227.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Louisiana State of et al.; State Colleges & Universities Bd. Supervisors/Trustees; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 2000,4147; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 03-00252.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Jane DOE and Mary Doe v. Jack DOE and the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board.
    No. 2003-C-1192.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Doe, Jane et al.; Doe, Mary;— Plaintiffs); Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 411,847; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0940.

Denied.


text:
    Curtis WIGGINS and Ruth Wiggins v. Jason LANDRY, Stevie G’s Properties, L.L.C. and ABC Insurance Company.
    No. 2003-CC-1199.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re ALEA London Ltd.; — Other; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Assumption, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 26,726; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2003 CW 0027.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant the writ.

KNOLL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Jane DOE and Mary Doe v. Jack DOE and the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board.
    No. 2003-C-1202.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re East Baton Rouge Parish School Board; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 411,847; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0940.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant the writ.

WEIMER, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Wanda ELKINS v. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY.
    No. 2003-C-1208.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Elkins, Wanda; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Comp. Dist. 01 E, No. 02-00161; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No(s). 36,829-WCA, 36,889-WCA.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.

KNOLL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Pat Shelby TODD, Jr. v. Christine E. ANGELLOZ and Family Psychology Center, Inc.
    No. 2003-C-1210.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Todd, Pat Shelby Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 490522; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 1400.

Denied.


text:
    PARC FONTAINE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION v. James Kelly LAMBERT.
    No. 2003-CC-1215.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Parc Fontaine Condominium Association; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Second City Court For The City Of New Orleans, No. 01-429; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-C-2265.

Denied.


text:
    Keith MASTERS and Rachael Diane Masters v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY.
    No. 2003-C-1219.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Masters, Keith et al.; Masters, Rachael Diane; — Plaintiffs); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 454,465; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,735-CA.

Denied.


text:
    Teresita C., Wife of/and Billy WEAVER v. Hillary R. OWENS, Strain Forest Products, and Clarendon National Insurance Company.
    No. 2003-C-1222.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Weaver, Teresita C.; Weaver, Billy; — Plaintiffs); Applying for Writ of Cer-tiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 99-15339; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0669.

Denied.


text:
    STATE in the Interest of Glenda S. DENNIS v. David K. BRADY.
    No. 2003-C-1142.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Brady, David K.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Livingston, 21st Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 86442; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0531.

Denied.


text:
    Charles YUSPEH, Julie Y. Benson, Joel Y. Ashner and Wallace Murphy v. Hansen E. KOCH, David E. Koch, Certified Security Systems, Inc., CSS Acquisition, L.L.C., and Michael Ditcharo.
    No. 2003-C-1134.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Koch, Hansen E. et al.; Koch, David E.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 526-535; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-CA-698.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.


text:
    Ronald HARRISON, Individually, and on Behalf of Doris Harrison and His Minor Child, Avery Doyle Harrison v. T. Richard SMITH, M.D. Meadowcrest Hospital, Dr. Wayne Grundmeyer and the Louisiana Patients Compensation Fund.
    No. 2003-C-0380.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Louisiana Patient’s Compensation Fund; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 429-570; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-CA-477.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    CITY OF BATON ROUGE, Parish of East Baton Rouge and the Department of Public Works v. Larry BERNARD and the Personnel Board of the City of Baton Rouge, Parish of East Baton Rouge.
    No. 2003-C-1005.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Baton Rouge City of; East Baton Rouge Parish of; Department of Public Works; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 474,293; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2001 CA 2468.

Denied.


text:
    NEW ORLEANS REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. Elmer LUCAS, or His Succession and Heirs, If Deceased.
    No. 2003-C-1060.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Alden, Wes M.D. d/b/a; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 2001-19460; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-CA-1546.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., would grant the writ.

KIMBALL, J., would grant the writ.

KNOLL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Marilyn SPITZFADEN, Individually, and as Representative of a Class of Those Similarly Situated v. DOW CORNING CORPORATION, et al.
    No. 1997-CC-0154.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Aesthetech Corp.; Cabot Industries Inc.; Surgitek/MEC; CV Sub 1987 Inc.; Surgitek Inc.; Cooper Companies Inc.; Natural Y Surgical Specialties; Medical Engineering Corp.; CVI Merger Corporation; Sirod Corporation; CopperSurg-ieal Inc.; Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.; Markham Medical International; — Defendants); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. F, No. 92-2589; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 96CW-2731.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.

KNOLL, J., recused.


text:
    Desiree BLACK v. STOLT-NIELSON, INC., Romeo Salac, Avondale Industries, Inc., ABC Insurance Company and Def Insurance Company.
    No. 2003-C-1198.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Black, Desiree; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 521-909; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-CA-1135.

Not considered. Not timely filed. See Supreme Court Rule X Section 5.


text:
    Charles YUSPEH, Julie Y. Benson, Joel Y. Ashner and Wallace Murphy v. Hansen E. KOCH, David E. Koch, Certified Security Systems, Inc., CSS Acquisition, L.L.C., and Michael Ditcharo.
    No. 2003-C-1144.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Yuspeh, Charles; Benson, Julie Y.; Ashner, Joel Y.; Murphy, Wallace; — Plaintiffs); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 526-535; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-CA-698.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.


text:
    Terri DAVIS, Charlene Unbehagen, Rachel Flanagan and Joseph Battle, Individually and on Behalf of His Minor Daughter, Victoria Wilson and Other Consolidated Cases v. AMERICAN HOME PRODUCTS CORPORATION, A Delaware Corporation d/b/a Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories.
    No. 2003-C-1180.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. K, Nos. 94-11684, 94-12699, 95-3139; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No(s). 2002-CA-0942, 2002-CA-0943, 2002-CA-0944.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., recused.

VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.

KNOLL, J., concurs in the denial. Based on the showing made, I cannot say the trial court erred in granting certification. However, if during the course of the proceedings it becomes apparent the individual issues of causation will predominate over common issues, defendants may file a motion for decertification of the class.


text:
    Janice GARDNER, Patricia Cammon, Mary J. Desoto, Ann Rieth, Karen Kelly, Joyce Richardson, Clara Stirgus, Maggie Hollomon Sylvas, Elizabeth Thebault, Marie Ferrina Surviving Spouse of Frank Ferrina and Dorthy Wilson v. The STATE of Louisiana, Through the DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, the State of Louisiana Through the Division of Administration, and the Jefferson Parish School Board
    No. 2003-C-1183.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In Re Gardner, Janice; Cammon, Patricia; Desoto, Mary J.; Reith, Ann; Kelly, Karen; Richardson, Joyce; Stirgus, Clara; Sylvas, Maggie Holloman; Thebault, Elizabeth; — Plaintiffis); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, Nos. 449,480; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No.2002 CA 0643.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., would grant the writ.

KIMBALL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Aretha MORRELL, Jacqueline Walker and Bryant Walker v. Alvin DUPLANTIER, Tull Metals, and Travelers Insurance Company.
    No. 2003-CC-1196.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Morrell, Aretha et al.; Walker, Jacqueline; Walker, Bryant; — Plaintiffis); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 567-305; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 03-C-147.

Granted and remanded to court of appeal for briefing, argument and full opinion.


text:
    Josephine COSTELLO v. Ashton R. HARDY, Bradford D. Carey, Hardy and Carey, L.L.P. and XYZ Insurance Company.
    No. 2003-C-1146.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Costello, Josephine; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. 523-232; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 2002-CA-1156.

Granted.


text:
    Gary L. RING, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Similarly Situated v. STATE of Louisiana DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT and the Division of Weights and Standards.
    No. 2003-CD-1772.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Louisiana State of et al.; Transportation & Dev. Dept, of; Weights & Standards Div. of; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 481,767.

Writ granted. This court’s appellate jurisdiction is not invoked. La. Const. Ann. Art. V, Section 5; La. Sup. Court Rule X, Section 5. Case transferred to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit.


text:
    Gabriel OUBRE Versus Azmi Eslaih, Reassurance of New York, Nighthawk Cab Company, Marc Williams and Allstate Insurance Company c/w Melanie Eslaih, Wife of/and Azmi Eslaih Versus Marc D. Williams, Allstate Insurance Company and Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development c/w Martin Mongrue v. Azmi ESLAIH, Reassurance of New York, Nighthawk CAB Company, Marc Williams and Allstate Insurance Company.
    No. 2003-C-1133.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re New Orleans City of; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. C, Nos. 96-18270, 96-9004, 96-18357; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No(s). 2002-CA-1386, 2002-CA-1387, 2002-CA-1388.

Granted.


text:
    Belinda LEVY, Corliss Aguilard, Laurie Alexander, Cheryl Beaver, Mary Lou Blakeman, Pamela Braud, Edward J. Domingue, Celeste Falconer, Dan Hahn, Shirley Knight, Roberta Land, Sandra Lawhon, Lynn Marzoni, David Monahan, Valerie S. Monahan, Dave Moore, Laura Morris, Marilyn Palmero, Merry Parker, Jackie Philips, Erin Powell, Tom Sealy, Rebecca M. Sencial, Kathleen Severs, Dianne Short, Starr Steckler, Karen Shipley, Glenda Thorne and Greta Woods v. ST. TAMMANY PARISH SCHOOL BOARD.
    No. 2003-C-1221.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 27, 2003.
   In re Levy, Belinda et al.; Aguilard, Corliss; Alexander, Laurie; Beaver, Cheryl; Blakeman, Mary Lou; Braud, Pamela; Domingue, Edward J.; Falconer, Celeste; Hahn, Dan; Knight, Shirley; Land, Roberta; Lawhon, Sandra; Marzoni, Lynn; Monahan, David; Monahan, Valerie S.; Moore, Dave; Morris, Laura; Palme-ro, Marilyn; Parker, Merry; Philips, Jackie; Powell, Erin; Sealy, Tom; Sencial, Rebecca M.; Severs, Kathleen; Short, Dianne; StecMer, Starr; Shipley, Karen; Thorne, Glenda; Woods, Greta; — Plaintiffs); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 89-16642; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 CA 0781.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


author: | ?SUSAN M. CHEHARDY, Judge.

text:
    Robin G. JOHNSON and Virginia J. Gallardo v. Norman Kirk LANOIX.
    No. 03-CA-143.
    Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.
    May 28, 2003.
    Olden C. Toups, Jr., Grant & Barrow, Gretna, LA, Counsel for Appellants, Robin Johnson and Virginia Gallardo.
    Panel composed of Judges MARION F. EDWARDS, SUSAN M. CHEHARDY and CLARENCE E. McMANUS.
   | ?SUSAN M. CHEHARDY, Judge.

In this defamation case, the trial judge, after a hearing, awarded the plaintiffs damages of $1,000.00 each. The plaintiffs appeal that amount as abusively low. For the reasons that follow, we amend the trial court’s ruling and affirm as amended.

Facts

The plaintiffs, Robin Gallardo Johnson and Virginia Jeanette Gallardo, are sisters who live in' Terrytown, Louisiana. They live in the same neighborhood as the defendant, Norman Kirk Lanoix.

The sisters were hired by the Jefferson Parish Clerk of Court to work as Poll Commissioners at Precinct No. 237 for the general election on November 7, 2000. Lanoix was Poll Commissioner in Charge of that Precinct.

In the days preceding the November 7, 2000 election, Lanoix contacted Robin Johnson and advised her that she was not to report to work on election day. Ms. Johnson contacted Don Canino to verify LaNoix’s instructions and Canino advised Johnson to report to the Poll as scheduled.

Around this same time, Elphy Frank Daigle, another Poll Commissioner from Lanoix’s precinct, received a handwritten Notice to Leave Premises Form from La-noix, which ordered Daigle to remain at least 600 feet away from the Polling place on election day. The record does not reflect whether Ms. Johnson, |aMs. Gallardo, or Mr. Daigle reported to work as Poll Commissioners on November 7, 2000.

In December of that same year, the sisters began receiving numerous magazines that they did not order. For several months, the sisters and, as they later learned, another neighbor, Alta Maynard, received over 50 magazines a month that they had not ordered.

On January 2, 2001, the supervisor of the Terrytown Recreation Department contacted Ms. Johnson, who sits on the Board of Directors for the Terrytown Gym Boosters Club, and asked her to meet with him. When she arrived, the supervisor showed her a postcard that he had received. The handwritten postcard purported to be from Robin Johnson and stated that, as required by law, she was reporting to people in her neighborhood that she had been convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, possession of child pornography, possession with intent to distribute child pornography, child endangerment, sexual battery of a juvenile, and statutory rape.

In time, Ms. Johnson learned that similar postcards had also been mailed to two families in her neighborhood as well as Terrytown Elementary School, Christ the King School, St. Rosalie School, Terrytown Library, and her place of employment, the Jewish Community Center. After receiving this postcard, the Jewish Community Center did not renew her employment-contract for that year. As a result, Ms. Johnson lost income totaling $11,433.00.

On January 5, 2001, Ms. Gallardo received a bill from Time Magazine for gift magazine subscriptions that she had allegedly ordered for her sister and someone named Alta Maynard. Ms. Gallardo had not, however, ordered these magazines. At that time, she did not know Ms. Maynard. As a result of this incident, however, Ms. Johnson met and spoke with Ms. Maynard. During this ^meeting, the sisters learned that Ms. Maynard was also a Poll Commissioner assigned to Lanoix’s precinct.

On January 23, 2001, Ms. Johnson received a letter from the United States Post Office stating that her request to forward her mail from her home to her place of employment had been received. Ms. Johnson had not, however, submitted a request to have her mail forwarded. Around that same date, Ms. Maynard received a similar notice from the United States Post Office that, per her request, her mail would be forwarded to Aaska. Like Ms. Johnson, she had not submitted a forwarding order for her mail either.

After this incident, the sisters, along with Daigle and Maynard, contacted the Jefferson Parish Sheriffs Office to investigate these occurrences. After speaking with Detective David Spera of the Criminal Investigations Division of the Jefferson Parish Sheriffs Office, Ms. Johnson learned of another troubling incident.

Detective Spera informed Ms. Johnson that he had received a fax from the Pastor of the New Hope Baptist Church in Gret-na, Reverend Dufrene. The fax was a letter to Reverend Dufrene, which was received on or about January 15, 2001, purportedly from Ms. Johnson asking for help with her addiction to having sexual relations with her children and her nephew, Ms. Gallardo’s son. The letter also reported that Ms. Gallardo not only permitted Ms. Johnson to have sex with her son but also encouraged this behavior. Both Ms. Johnson and Ms. Gallardo state that these allegations were false.

In February of 2001, handwriting analysis of the postcard and the Notice to Leave Premises sent by Lanoix to Daigle was conducted. As a result, the Jefferson | ^Parish Sheriffs Office determined that the same person, Lanoix, wrote both documents.

On September 17, 2001, Ms. Johnson and Ms. Gallardo filed suit for personal injuries and defamation against Lanoix. On October 11, 2001, Lanoix filed an answer affirmatively admitting ten of eleven allegations of the plaintiffs’ petition and failing to deny the eleventh allegation. In essence, Lanoix admitted all of the allegations of the plaintiffs’ petition.

On June 18, 2002, the matter proceeded to trial for determination of damages. Although the record reflects that Lanoix received personal notice of the trial date, he did not appear for trial. At trial, Robin Johnson testified that, after the Jewish Community Center received the defamatory postcard purportedly from her reporting her sex offense convictions, the Center did not renew her employment contract. She lost $11,433.00 in income.

She also testified that, after the supervisor of the Terrytown Booster Club received a similar postcard, people approached her at the playground and questioned her about the contents of the postcard. She testified that she felt that she had to produce a police report “to prove my innocence.” She was very distressed because several of the people did not know her before this incident so she felt that they believed the false statements made in the postcard. As a result of this distress, she was physically ill, lost sleep, cried frequently, and felt depressed. She felt that she was still experiencing this distress at the time of trial.

Finally, she stated that, after these incidents, she was afraid of Lanoix, who lived “right down the street.” She testified that, if she was outside of her house Lwhen Lanoix drove by her house, “he would almost come to a complete stop and he would just glare at me.”

At trial, Virginia Gallardo testified that the only false statement made about her was in the letter sent to Reverend Dufrene of the New Hope Baptist Church, alleging that she encouraged her sister to have sexual relations with her son. She felt sure that Reverend Dufrene believed that statements contained in the letter because he reported it to the Jefferson Parish Sheriffs Office. She experienced depression, mental distress and sleeplessness because of this false allegation. She also was afraid that, like her sister, she might lose her job with the Jefferson Parish School Board because of this false allegation.

After hearing the plaintiffs’ testimony, the trial judge took the matter under advisement. On November 7, 2002, the trial judge without written reasons issued judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, awarding each plaintiff $1,000.00 plus interest and costs. On November 25, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a petition for devolutive appeal.

On appeal, plaintiffs argue that the amount of damages awarded is abusively low. Specifically, both plaintiffs argue that the award of $1,000.00 for general damages was “just too low in light of the actual damages suffered and in light of the egregious nature of the defamations herein.” Ms. Johnson contends that the trial court erred in failing to award her special damages of $11,433.00 in income lost as a direct result of the defamatory postcard.

The elements of an action in defamation are defamatory words, publication, falsity, malice (actual or implied), and resulting injury. Albarado v. Abadie, et al., 97-478 (La.App. 5 Cir. 11/12/97), 703 So.2d 736 (citing Cangelo si v. Schwegmann Bros. Giant Super Markets, 390 So.2d 196, 198 (La.1980)). Words which impute a crime to another are defamatory per se. Id.

|7In this case, defendant’s alleged statements implicated plaintiffs in criminal behavior, and, thus, they are classed as defamatory per se and malice or reckless disregard of truth need not be alleged. Id. (citing Fourcade v. City of Gretna, 598 So.2d 415, 419 (La.App. 5 Cir.1992)). Further, in this case, defendant admitted each of the allegations of the plaintiffs’ petition. Therefore, at trial, the sole issue for the trier of fact was damages.

In Theriot v. Allstate Ins. Co., 625 So.2d 1337 (La.1993), the Louisiana Supreme Court stated:

Our jurisprudence has consistently held that in the assessment of damages, much discretion is left to the judge or jury, and upon appellate review such awards will be disturbed only when there has been a clear abuse of that discretion. And, “[i]t is only after articulated analysis of the facts discloses an abuse of discretion, that the award may on appellate review be considered either excessive or insufficient.” Appellate courts review the evidence in the light which most favorably supports the judgment to determine whether the trier of fact was clearly wrong in its conclusions. Before an appellate court can disturb the quantum of an award, the record must clearly reveal that the jury abused its discretion. In order to make this determination, the reviewing court looks first to the individual circumstances of the injured plaintiff. Only after analysis of the facts and circumstances peculiar to the particular case and plaintiff may an appellate court conclude that the award is inadequate.
Prior awards under similar circumstances serve only as a general guide. If the appellate court determines that an abuse of discretion has been committed, it is then appropriate to resort to a review of prior awards, to determine the appropriate modification of the award. In such review, the test is whether the present award is greatly disproportionate to the mass of past awards for truly similar injuries. In instances where the appellate court is compelled to modify awards, the award will only be disturbed to the extent of lowering or raising an award to the highest or lowest point which is reasonably within the discretion afforded the trial court.
This court recently considered the standard of appellate review of general damages awards in Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 623 So.2d 1257, 1261 (La.1993); the majority opinion contains the following commentary of the interpretation and application of the controlling legal precepts:
The standard for appellate review of general damage awards is difficult to express and is necessarily non-specific, and the requirement of an articulated basis for disturbing such awards gives little guidance as to what ^articulation suffices to justify modification of a generous or stingy award. Nevertheless, the theme that emerges from Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La. 239, 158 So.2d 149 (1963) through Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., 341 So.2d 332 (La.1976), and through Reck [v. Stevens, 373 So.2d 498 (La.1979)] to the present case is that the discretion vested in the trier of fact is “great,” and even vast, so that an appellate court should rarely disturb an award of general damages. Reasonable persons frequently disagree about the measure of general damages in a particular case. It is only when the award is, in either direction, beyond that which a reasonable trier of fact could assess for the effects of the particular injury to the particular plaintiff under the particular circumstances that the appellate court should increase or reduce the award., (Citations omitted.)

Id. at 1341-1342.

An award of damages in a defamation case is left to the great discretion of the trier of fact and should not be disturbed absent a showing of manifest error. Connor, et al. v. Scroggs, et al, 35,521 (La.App. 2 Cir. 06/12/02), 821 So.2d 542, 552. Damages for defamation include both special damages and nonpecuniary or general damages. Id. General damages may include injury to reputation, personal humiliation, embarrassment, mental anguish, anxiety and hurt feelings. Id.

The evidence shows that Lanoix published false statements about Ms. Johnson, which purported to be disclosures from Ms. Johnson, that she was convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, possession of child pornography, possession with intent to distribute child pornography, child endangerment, sexual battery of a juvenile, and statutory rape. Lanoix published these false statements to neighborhood organizations, elementary schools, neighbors, and her employer. Ms. Johnson was approached by numerous people who had learned of the allegations and who questioned her about their veracity. She was so distraught by these allegations that she felt physically ill, lost sleep, cried frequently, and became depressed. Her employer, after learning of the allegation, refused to renew her contract so she also lost income.

|3Lanoix also mailed a letter to a local church pastor, purportedly from Ms. Johnson ashing for counseling for her addiction to sexual activity with her children and her nephew, Ms. Gallardo’s son. In the letter, the writer also defamed Ms. Gallardo by stating that Ms. Gallardo encouraged Ms. Johnson to have sexual relations with Ms. Gallardo’s son. The pastor of the church believed the allegation and forwarded the allegation to the Jefferson Parish Sheriffs Office. Fortunately for Ms. Johnson and Ms. Gallardo, the detective, after investigation, determined that the letter was fraudulent and notified the pastor.

Clearly, contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, possession of child pornography,' possession with intent to distribute child pornography, child endangerment, sexual battery of a juvenile, and statutory rape are serious crimes. Publishing declarations by a person purporting to admit to criminal convictions of that nature is equally serious in light of the public humiliation such allegations could cause the accused person. Further, publishing false statements of that nature to churches, schools, recreational facilities, and to a person’s employer would obviously cause considerable damage to a person’s reputation in the community. Such claims in a small community like Terrytown could be very humiliating as they could quickly permeate and divide a tight-knit community in which there is little anonymity. Moreover, considering Ms. Johnson’s position on the Terrytown Gym Booster Club, such allegations were even more severe.

Both Ms. Johnson and Ms. Gallardo testified that they were humiliated and embarrassed by the claims made by Lanoix. Further, Ms. Johnson felt that her reputation in the community was injured. Both women also testified that they suffered mental anguish, anxiety, sleeplessness, and depression. Finally, Ms. Johnson testified that she lost her job at the Jewish Community Center as a direct result of La-noix’s actions.

ItnWe find that the trial court’s award of $1,000.00 in general damages for the injuries suffered by Ms. Johnson constitutes a clear abuse of that court’s “much discretion” in making such awards under the facts and circumstances surrounding the injuries suffered by Ms. Johnson and their effect on her.

In Connor v. Scroggs, supra, the Connors alleged that their four-year-old daughter, C.C., was molested by the Scroggs during an overnight stay at their home. The Second Circuit affirmed the trial court’s award of $85,000.00 to the Scroggs for their embarrassment and humiliation, considering the seriousness of the allegations, the small community in which they were made, and the length of time which it ultimately took the Scroggs to clear their names.

In Trentecosta v. Beck, 95-0096 (La.App. 4 Cir. 02/25/98), 714 So.2d 721, on remand from the Louisiana Supreme Court for determination of damages, the Fourth Circuit awarded plaintiff $50,000.00 for a defamatory statement by a police officer’s statement that plaintiff was guilty of bilking thousands of dollars from charities using his Bingo Hall over the years. The appellate court also awarded, under direction from the Louisiana Supreme Court, $94,357.50 for business losses arising out of the defamatory statement.

In Thomas v. Busby, 95-1147 (La.App. 3 Cir. 03/06/96), 670 So.2d 603, writ granted for other reasons, 96-0891 (La.05/17/96), 673 So.2d 601, the trial court awarded $25,000.00 considering the “extreme embarrassment over a continuing period of time as a result of this defamation” to an attorney accused of stealing potting soil from a Wal-Mart store. The award was affirmed on appeal.

In Smith v. Atkins, 622 So.2d 795 (La.App. 4 Cir.1993), the Fourth Circuit increased a defamation award to $5,000 on proof that a college teacher referred in class to plaintiff, a female student, as a “slut,” causing negative reactions by her lnfellow students and requiring plaintiff to seek psychiatric help for depressive disorder.

In Lege v. White, 619 So.2d 190 (La.App. 3 Cir.1993), White said on more than one occasion and to more than one person that she was an undercover narcotics officer for the Vermillion Parish Sheriffs Office and was investigation Lege for the use and sale of illegal drugs. Other rumors, allegedly emanating from White and her relative implicated Lege for drug use and for hosting parties involving nudity, sex, and drug use. The court of appeal accepted the trial court’s credibility determinations that led it to award $500 arising out of one or two prior incidents of suspicious events dating back to 1970, and awarded an additional $5,000 for White’s defamatory statements made in connection with a 1986 eviction proceeding.

In Melancon v. Hyatt, 589 So.2d 1186 (La.App. 4 Cir.1991), 592 So.2d 411 (La.1992), the Fourth Circuit reduced an award of $22,500 for loss of reputation, $45,000 for mental pain and suffering, and $22,500 for embarrassment and humiliation where there was no testimony as to plaintiffs loss of reputation in the community and he did not seek medical help for his alleged depression. The award was reduced to $10,000 for pain and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, and loss of reputation, combined, then the highest reported Louisiana award in general damages for defamation.

After our review, we find that the lowest amount the trier of fact could have reasonably awarded for general damages, including pain and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, and loss of reputation, for Ms. Johnson to be $8,500.00. Further, we also find that the trier of fact abused its discretion in failing to awarding $11,433.00 in lost wages to Ms. Johnson. Under the circumstances, we also find that $3,500 was the lowest amount the trier of fact could have | ^reasonably awarded to Ms. Gallar-do for her emotional distress, embarrassment and humiliation.

Accordingly, for the reasons given, we amend the judgment of the trial court to award plaintiffs a total of $23,433.00, which includes $11,433.00 in lost wages and $8,500 in general damages to Robin Gallar-do Johnson and $3,500.00 to Virginia Jeanette Gallardo. In all other respects, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed. Finally, all costs of this appeal are assessed against Norman Kirk Lanoix.

JUDGMENT AMENDED AND AFFIRMED AS AMENDED.

      . The record does not reflect whether criminal charges were filed against Lanoix.

      . La. C.C. art. 1004 provides, in pertinent part, that, "The answer shall admit or deny the allegations of fact contained in each paragraph of the petition, and all such allegations, other than those as to the amount of damages, are admitted if not denied in the answer.”

      .La. C.C.P. art. 4904(A) reads, "In suits in a parish court or a city court, if the defendant fails to answer timely, or if he fails to appear at the trial, and the plaintiff proves his case, a final judgment in favor of plaintiff may be rendered. No prior default is necessary.”

      . On remand, this case was written for a five-judge panel by Judge Waltzer, with Judge Lobrano concurring and Judges Armstrong and Landrieu dissenting.


author:
WHIPPLE, J.,
      WHIPPLE, J., WEIMER, J.,

text:
    Spencer SEAL, Sherry Seal and Donnie Seal v. ST. TAMMANY PARISH HOSPITAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 1 D/B/A St. Tammany Parish Hospital Sherry Dickerson Seal and Donnie Seal, Individually and on Behalf of Their Minor Children, Spencer Seal and Joshua Seal, and Mitchell Dickerson v. St. Tammany Parish Hospital Service District No. 1 D/B/A St. Tammany Parish Hospital
    No. 99 CW 2914.
    Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.
    Jan. 27, 2000.
    Order Denying Rehearing April 27, 2000.
   WRIT GRANTED. The trial court’s ruling of November 12, 1999, denying relator’s Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby reversed and judgment is entered in relator’s favor, dismissing plaintiffs’ cause of action in strict liability. We find DeBattista v. Argonaut-Southwest Ins. Co., 403 So.2d 26 (La.1981) and Faucheaux v. Alton Ochsner Medical Foundation Hosp. And Clinic, 470 So.2d 878 (La.1985) to be distinguishable from this case as those decisions were rendered before the Hepatitis C virus had been discovered and concerned circumstances where the period of time between the blood transfusion, diagnosis of Hepatitis B, and the filing of suit was relatively short, and the Hepatitis virus complained of was known to exist at the time the transfusion was given. Because those circumstances do not exist in this case, the results in DeBattista and Faucheaux do not apply to this matter. See § 402A Restatement of Torts (2d), comment k. The only cause of action available to plaintiffs in this case is negligence.

WHIPPLE, J.,

dissents and would deny the writ. The res nova factual and legal issues presented in this writ application make this case improper for resolution by motion for summary judgment.

APPLICATION FOR REHEARING DENIED; MOTIONS TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS GRANTED.

WHIPPLE, J.,

concurs in the granting of the motions to file amicus curiae briefs, but dissents from the denial of the rehearing as I would grant the application for rehearing and would reverse the majority opinion herein which originally granted the writ.

On rehearing, I would maintain the trial court’s ruling denying the motion for summary judgment. The res nova factual and legal issues which were raised in the original writ application are inappropriate for resolution by motion for summary judgment. For this reason, the trial court’s ruling which denied the motion for summary judgment should have been maintained.

WEIMER, J.,

concurs in the granting of the motions to file amicus curiae briefs, but dissents from the denial of the rehearing as I would grant the application for rehearing for the following reasons.

The factual distinctions previously relied on by this Court, in light of Branch v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center, 636 So.2d 211 (La.1994), cannot serve to defeat plaintiffs’ strict liability claim in this case. Based on Branch and DeBattista v. Argonaut-Southwest Ins. Co., 403 So.2d 26 (La.1981), I am constrained to find the law prior to the effective dates of LSA-R.S. 9:2797 and LSA-C.C. art. 2322.1 permits a plaintiff to assert a strict liability claim for damages allegedly sustained as a result of blood transfusions received prior to the effective dates of such legislation.

If a strict liability claim exists in this matter, it must then be determined whether the “unavoidably unsafe” defense of comment k of Section 402(A) of the Restatement (Second) of Torts may be asserted. No case has squarely faced this issue. In DeBattista, the court discussed the history of strict products liability claims in Louisiana and noted the similarity of the reasoning in Weber v. Fidelity & Cas. Co. of N.Y., 259 La. 599, 250 So.2d 754 (La.1971) to Section 402(A) of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, both of which contain an “unreasonableness” component. DeBattista, 403 So.2d at 30. After noting the several jurisdictions which abrogated the requirement that the defect be “unreasonably dangerous,” the DeBattista Court specifically determined “that the requirement of an unreasonable risk as a condition to strict liability should be retained.” DeBattista, 403 So.2d at 31.

In DeBattista, the defendants contended that the danger presented by the blood was reasonable because the screening test used to detect Hepatitis B, a known contaminant, was not one hundred (100%) percent effective, and that this relatively small percentage of unwholesome blood which the test could not detect was not unreasonably dangerous in comparison to the larger amount of blood which had properly been screened given the social utility of blood. DeBattista, 403 So.2d at 30. This is a different argument than is being presented by defendants in the instant case, i.e., that blood is unavoidably unsafe, and thus not unreasonably dangerous, when it is contaminated by an unknown and undiscovered virus for which a screening test did not exist at the time of the transfusion. That the defendants’ arguments in DeBat-tista were rejected should not be interpreted to foreclose all arguments in which the risk presented by blood is contended to be reasonable.

Although Branch involved an individual who allegedly contracted Hepatitis C as a result of a blood transfusion, the Supreme Court addressed a prescription issue. The Supreme Court did not address the issue of whether a blood transfusion given in 1976 and allegedly tainted with Hepatitis C is unreasonably dangerous or specifically what defenses were available. Whether a blood transfusion, contaminated with Hepatitis C when given in 1973, was unreasonably dangerous is a question of fact.

In sum, the plaintiffs are entitled to submit their case based on a theory of strict liability and the defendants are entitled to present a defense relative to whether a blood transfusion, given in 1973, which is alleged to be the cause of plaintiffs Hepatitis C, was “unavoidably unsafe.” See Restatement of Law of Torts (Second) Section 402(A), comment k.

      . But see the dissent by Justice Blanche in DeBattista and Justice Lemmon in Branch.

        . I note that this section has been changed with the Restatement (Third) of the Law of Torts. However, DeBattista and Branch relied upon the Restatement (Second) of the Law of Torts.


author: [¡¿PARRO, J.

text:
    Jesse BOUDREAUX, Jr. v. ANGELO IAFRATE CONSTRUCTION.
    No. 2002 CA 0992.
    Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.
    Feb. 14, 2003.
    Rehearing Denied March 24, 2003.

      Michael S. Zerlin, Thibodaux, for Plaintiff-Appellant Jesse Boudreaux, Jr.
    Christopher M. Landry, Blue Williams, L.L.P., Metairie, for Defendant-Appellee Angelo Iafrate Construction.
    Before: PARRO, MCDONALD, CLAIBORNE, JJ.

      . Judge Ian W. Claiborne, retired from the Eighteenth Judicial District Court, is serving as judge pro tempore by special appointment of the Louisiana Supreme Court.

   [¡¿PARRO, J.

In this workers’ compensation action, the claimant appeals from the judgment sustaining a peremptory exception raising the objection of prescription and dismissing his claim for workers’ compensation benefits. For the following reasons, this court affirms in part, reverses in part, and remands.

Factual Background and Procedural History

On February 28, 2001, Jesse Boudreaux, Jr. (Boudreaux) filed a workers’ compensation claim against Angelo Iafrate Construction (Angelo) for weekly workers’ compensation benefits and medical expenses. In his disputed claim form, Bou-dreaux alleged the following. In September or October of 1999, while on a job for Angelo, the truck that Boudreaux was driving hit a hole, causing him to strike his head on the cab of the truck, injuring his neck. Boudreaux informed his supervisor of the incident. Boudreaux indicated that his resulting injury did not manifest itself until January 2001.

Angelo responded by filing an answer, along with an exception raising the objection of prescription. Following a trial on the exception, the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) found that Boudreaux’s injury immediately manifested itself; therefore, his claim for workers’ compensation benefits should have been filed within one year of the accident. In the absence of a timely fifing, the WCJ rendered a judgment, sustaining Angelo’s peremptory exception raising the objection of prescription and dismissing Boudreaux’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits. From this judgment, Boudreaux appeals.

Standard of Review

In a workers’ compensation case, as in other cases, the appellate court’s review of factual findings is governed by the manifest error or clearly wrong standard. Smith v. Louisiana Department of Corrections, 93-1305 (La.2/28/94), 633 So.2d 129, 132; Kennedy v. Security Industrial Insurance Company, 623 So.2d 174, 175 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 629 So.2d 389 (La.1993). The two-part test for the appellate review of a factual finding is: 1) whether there is a reasonable factual basis in the record for the finding of the trial court, and 2) whether the record further establishes that the | -¡finding; is not manifestly erroneous. Mart v. Hill, 505 So.2d 1120, 1127 (La.1987). Thus, if there is no reasonable factual basis in the record for the trial court’s finding, no additional inquiry is necessary. However, if a reasonable factual basis exists, an appellate court may set aside a trial court’s factual finding only if, after reviewing the record in its entirety, it determines the trial court’s finding was clearly wrong. See Stobart v. State, through Department of Transportation and Development, 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993).

Prescription of Indemnity Benefits Claim

Angelo contends that Boudreaux’s claim is barred by prescription. Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1209 addresses the prescriptive period for workers’ compensation claims, providing in relevant part:

A. In case of personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, all claims for payments shall be forever barred unless within one year after the accident -or death the parties have agreed upon the payments to be made under this Chapter, or unless within one year after the accident a formal claim has been filed as provided in ... this Chapter.... [W]hen the injury does not result at the time of, or develop immediately after the accident, the limitation shall not take effect until expiration of one year from the time the injury develops, but in all such cases the claim for payment shall be forever barred unless the proceedings have been begun within two years from the date of the accident.
C. All claims for medical benefits payable pursuant to R.S. 23:1203 shall be forever barred unless within one year after the accident or death the parties have agreed upon the payments to be made under this Chapter, or unless within one year after the accident a formal claim has been filed with the office as provided in this Chapter.

The burden of proving the peremptory exception raising the objection of prescription is on the party asserting it. However, when the claimant’s cause of action has prescribed on the face of his own petition, the claimant bears the burden of proving facts, which would have the effect of interrupting or suspending the running of prescription. Moreover, the ordinary rule of the burden of proof is that one who claims the benefit of an exception to the general law must show he comes within the exception. Houston General Insurance Company v. Commercial Union Insurance Company, 612 So.2d 787, 789 (La.App. 1st Cir.1992), writ denied, 614 So.2d 82 (La.1993).

|40ne exception to the general rule is when an employee suffers a work-related injury that immediately manifests itself, but only later develops into a disability. Boudreaux argues, in essence, that his injury did not fully manifest itself until January 2001 when it became disabling, and therefore, his claim was filed timely. Angelo denies that Boudreaux’s condition falls into the exception to the general prescription rule because his injury manifested itself immediately following the accident.

Boudreaux’s claim was filed on February 28, 2001, at least one year and four months following the date of the accident. Because his disputed claim was filed more than one year after the accident, the burden was on Boudreaux to prove that his claim had not prescribed. See Cedotal v. Wausau Insurance Company, 497 So.2d 395, 404 (La.App. 3rd Cir.), writ denied, 498 So.2d 757 (La.1986); Comardelle v. Jeandron Chevrolet, Inc., 449 So.2d 601, 603 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 456 So.2d 1015 (La.1984). In order to resolve the prescription issue, it is necessary to determine whether Boudreaux’s condition was of a developmental nature. This is a question of fact, which must be determined from the testimony and evidence in the record before us. See Hobley v. Phoenix of Hartford Insurance Company, 233 So.2d 589, 590 (La.App. 4th Cir.1970).

Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1209(A) provides that an injury not resulting at the time of, or developing immediately after, the accident is a developing injury. Generally speaking, development of the injury actually means development of the disability, and disability marks the time from which it is clear that the employee is no longer able to perform the duties of his or her employment in a satisfactory manner. Swearingen v. Air Products & Chemical, Inc., 481 So.2d 122, 124 (La.1986). The Louisiana Supreme Court has consistently held that an employee who suffers a work-related injury that immediately manifests itself, but only later develops into a disability, has a viable cause of action until one year from the development of the disability, rather than from the first appearance of symptoms or from the first date of treatment. Sevin v. Schwegmann Giant Supermarkets, Inc., 94-1859 (La.4/10/95), 652 So.2d 1323, 1326.

The jurisprudence offers guidelines for establishing when a developing injury has reached the disabling point for purposes of applicability of this exception to the one-year | ^prescriptive period. In the case of the retained employee who continues to work with symptoms which might have been held to be disabling (if litigated), but which did not become manifestly disabling to the employee until he was physically forced to quit his work, the disability does not become manifest or “develop” until that date, because to select an earlier date would be dealing in conjecture. Bolden v. Georgia Casualty and Surety Company, 363 So.2d 419, 421-422 (La.1978). In cases of this nature, the policy is to encourage rather than penalize an employee who continues, working despite a work-related medical condition, which is painful, but not then disabling. Sevin v. Schwegmann Giant Supermarkets, Inc., 652 So.2d at 1326. Since Boudreaux filed his claim on February 28, 2001, he must establish that any developing injury did not manifest itself as a disability prior to February 28, 2000, in order for his claim to have been timely filed.

At the trial of a peremptory exception, evidence'may be introduced to support or controvert any of the objections pleaded, when the grounds thereof do not appear from the petition. LSA-C.C.P. art. 931. Generally, in the absence of evidence, the objection of prescription must be decided upon the facts alleged in the petition, and all allegations thereof are accepted as true. Daisey v. Time Warner, 98-2199 (La.App. 1st Cir.11/5/99), 761 So.2d 564, 567. A review of the record reveals that at the hearing on the peremptory exception, Boudreaux failed to introduce any evidence to support the application of the developing injury doctrine. Therefore, we may only consider the facts set forth in his disputed claim form and not those alleged in any memoranda. The pertinent allegations are as follows: in September or October of 1999, while on a job for Angelo, the truck that Boudreaux was driving hit a hole, causing him to strike his head and neck; Boudreaux informed his supervisor of the incident; his resulting injury did not manifest itself until January 2001.

The issue of whether Boudreaux sustained a developing injury was one of a factual nature. We are mindful of the rule of law placing on Boudreaux the burden of proving he fell within one of the exceptions to prescription because his claim was filed more than one year after the accident. The WCJ determined that Boudreaux fell short of carrying that burden of proof based on a finding that Boudreaux’s injury immediately | Bmanifested itself. Based on the entire record, this court cannot say that this finding, which' is reasonably supported by the record, was clearly wrong. Accordingly, we find no error in the WCJ’s finding that Boudreaux failed to prove that his claim for indemnity benefits had not prescribed.

However, we conclude that the WCJ erred in failing to give the claimant an opportunity to amend his disputed claim. Under the provisions of LSA-C.C.P. art. 934, when the grounds of an objection pleaded by the peremptory exception may be removed by amendment of the petition, the judgment sustaining the exception shall order such amendment within the delay allowed by the court. Bordelon v. Medical Center of Baton Rouge, 01-2164 (La.App. 1st Cir.12/20/02), 886 So.2d 407. In this matter, the judgment sustaining the exception did not provide the claimant the opportunity to amend his pleadings. Since it appears that the grounds of the objection may be removed by amendment of the petition, we remand this matter to the Office of Workers’ Compensation Administration to give the claimant a period of time to amend his disputed claim to provide more specific factual allegations regarding his injury and the manifestation of his disability.

Prescription of Medical Benefits Claim

Regarding the prescription of Boudreaux’s claims for medical benefits, Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1209(C) provides the prescriptive period for filing a formal claim for medical benefits. This provision states that a formal claim must be filed within one year after the accident or within one year from the last payment of medical benefits. Boudreaux’s claim for medical benefits filed on February 28, 2001, was not made within one year of the date of the accident, September or October 1999. Furthermore, Boudreaux’s disputed claim form discloses that at no time did Angelo ever pay any medical benefits to Boudreaux. Accordingly, neither of the time constraints in the statute has been satisfied. Therefore, we conclude that Boudreaux’s claim for medical expenses relating to the 1999 accident had prescribed, and the WCJ’s finding of such was not clearly 17wrong. See Lee v. East Baton Rouge Parish School Board, 623 So.2d 150, 156 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 627 So.2d 658 (La.1993).

Decree

For the foregoing reasons, that portion of the judgment of the WCJ sustaining Angelo Iafrate Construction’s peremptory-exception raising the objection of prescription as it relates to indemnity and medical benefits is affirmed. That portion of the judgment dismissing Jesse Boudreaux, Jr.’s disputed claim for medical benefits is affirmed; however, that portion of the judgment dismissing Jesse Boudreaux, Jr.’s disputed claim for indemnity benefits is reversed, and this matter is remanded to the Office of Workers’ Compensation Administration with instructions to order an amendment of the complaint to set forth facts which will overcome, if possible, the grounds of the objection of prescription. Each party is to bear its own costs from this appeal.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

      . The workers' compensation judge in this case was Honorable Glynn F. Voisin, of District 9.

      . This court notes that the legislature has not provided for a developing injury exception to the commencement of prescription on a claim for medical benefits, as it has done for a claim for weekly benefits in Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1209(A).