author: JOHNSON, Justice. KIMBALL, Justice,

text:
    SOUTHEAST WIRELESS NETWORK, INC., Slaydon Investment, Inc., and Celia Katz, Individually and in her Capacity as Independent Executrix for the Succession of Samuel B. Katz v. U.S. TELEMETRY CORPORATION, U.S., Telemetry Network, Inc., K. Steven Roberts, Thomas L. Siebert, Donald M. Clarke, S. Andrew Banks, Charles M. Bruce And James K. Gable.
    No. 2006-C-1736.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 11, 2007.

      Phelps Dunbar, Harry Alston Johnson, III, Michael Dale Hunt, Jane Ann Robert, Baton Rouge, Bruce A. Ericson, John M. Grenfell, for Applicant.
    Moore, Walters, Thompson, Thomas Pa-pillion & Cullens, Patrick Nelson Broyles, Joseph Elton Cullens, Jr., Stephen Layne Lee, Charles Roger Moore, Baton Rouge, Chehardy, Sherman, Ellis Breslin, Murray, Recile, Stephen D. Marx, Metairie, Kantrow, Spaht, Weaver & Blitzer, Paul Holden Spaht, Baton Rouge, Frank D. Blackburn & Associates, Allison Uhrich Rovira, Donald L. Beckner, Baton Rouge, for Respondent.
   JOHNSON, Justice.

hWe granted this writ application to address whether Louisiana courts can properly exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-resident director of a corporation which has its principal place of business in Louisiana. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the court of appeal, finding that the trial court may properly exercise jurisdiction over defendant James K. Gable.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Defendant, U.S. Telemetry Corporation (“USTC”) had a plan whereby it would develop equipment to transfer data using low-frequency radio waves (218 and 219 MHz bandwidth) that were auctioned off by the Federal Communications Commission in 1994. USTC was incorporated in Delaware, but at all relevant times, had its principal place of business in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Plaintiffs, all Louisiana residents and companies, owned the licenses for the radio bands. This |asuit arises out of a series of contractual and -securities transactions between the Plaintiffs and USTC, in which Plaintiffs either invested cash in USTC or transferred these licenses to USTC in exchange for company stock.

Plaintiffs allege that they suffered financial losses as a result of numerous misrepresentations and omissions of material facts made by USTC through members of its board of directors, including defendant, James K. Gable (“Gable”). Generally, these misrepresentations and omissions of material fact related to the state of USTC’s financial condition and the state of its technology. Plaintiffs allege that because of such misrepresentations and material - omissions, they paid cash and transferred FCC radio spectrum licences in exchange for securities in USTC, which resulted in financial losses.

The series of investments and contracts at issue took place from 1999 through September, 2001. Gable began his tenure as a director of USTC in June, 2001, after his employer, Texaco, made a substantial investment in USTC, entitling it to appoint a director to the board. Gable, a Texaco employee, and a California resident, voluntarily accepted a position on the board. Gable continued to serve on the board until he resigned in December, 2001.

Plaintiffs sued Gable and other directors for violations of Louisiana’s Blue Sky Law, La. R.S. 51:701 et seq., negligent or intentional misrepresentations, general tort liability, and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with various safes of USTC securities to the plaintiffs. Gable filed an Exception of Lack of Personal Jurisdiction which was sustained by the trial court. The trial court reasoned that Plaintiffs had not shown that Gable had sufficient contacts with Louisiana to subject him to the personal jurisdiction of the court. The court of appeal reversed, | .¡holding that a Louisiana court could assert personal jurisdiction over Gable, as a director of a foreign corporation with its principal place of business in Louisiana, without offending the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court of appeal reasoned that “[accepting such a corporate position is deemed to constitute a manifest decision to avail oneself of the protection of the laws of the forum, and therefore it is not unreasonable to subject such directors to personal jurisdiction in the forum notwithstanding that their actions may have been only in their official capacity.”

For the following reasons, we agree with the conclusion of the court of appeal.

DISCUSSION

Personal Jurisdiction

The Louisiana long-arm statute, La. R.S. 13:3201, provides for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant:

A. A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident, who acts directly or by an agent, as to a cause of action arising from any one of the following activities performed by the nonresident:

(1) Transacting any business in this state.
(2) Contracting to supply services or things in this state.
(3) Causing injury or damage by an offense or quasi offense committed through an act or omission in this state.
(4)Causing injury or damage in this state by an offense or quasi offense committed through an act or omission outside of this state if he regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of conduct, or derives revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered in this state.
|4B. In addition to the provisions of Subsection A, a court of this state may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident on any basis consistent with the constitution of this state and of the Constitution of the United States.

Subsection B was added in 1987 to ensure that jurisdiction under the long-arm statute extended to the limits allowed by due process. Official Comments, Acts 1987, No. 418. In Fox v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, 576 So.2d 978 (La.1991), this Court stated that “[sjince the 1987 amendment to LSA-R.S. 13:3201, the sole inquiry in Louisiana into jurisdiction over a nonresident is whether the assertion of. jurisdiction complies with constitutional due process, (citation omitted) The limits of the Louisiana long arm statute and the limits of constitutional due process are coextensive and therefore, if the assertion of jurisdiction meets the constitutional requirements of due process the assertion of jurisdiction is authorized under the long arm statute.” Fox, 576 So.2d at 983.

This due process requirement has evolved into a two-part test. In order to subject a nonresident defendant to personal jurisdiction, the defendant must have certain minimum contacts with the forum state such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945); de Reyes v. Marine Mgt. and Consulting, 586 So.2d 103 (La.1991).

The “minimum contacts” prong is satisfied by a single act or actions by which the defendant “purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum state, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.” Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 475, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 2183, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985). This “purposeful availment” must be such that the | ^defendant “should reasonably anticipate being haled into court” in the forum state. Ruckstuhl v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corporation, 1998-1126 (La.4/13/99), 731 So.2d 881, cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1019, 120 S.Ct. 526, 145 L.Ed.2d 407 (1999). This part of the test ensures that the defendant will not be haled into a jurisdiction solely as a result of a random, fortuitous or attenuated contact, or by the unilateral activity of another party or a third person, de Reyes, 586 So.2d at 106; Alonso v. Line, 2002-2644 (La.5/20/03), 846 So.2d 745, cert. denied, 540 U.S. 967, 124 S.Ct. 434, 157 L.Ed.2d 311 (2003). If the defendant deliberately engages in significant activities within a state, or creates continuing obligations between himself and residents of the forum, he manifestly has availed himself of the privilege of conducting business there. Because his activities are shielded by the benefits and protections of the forum’s laws, it is presumptively not unreasonable to require the defendant to submit to the burdens of litigation in that forum, de Reyes, 586 So.2d at 106.

The second part of the due process test centers around the fairness of the assertion of jurisdiction. Once minimum contacts are established, these contacts may be considered in light of other factors to determine whether the assertion of personal jurisdiction would comport with “fair play and substantial justice.” Burger King Corp., 471 U.S. at 476, 105 S.Ct. at 2184. Thus, once the plaintiff meets his burden of proving minimum contacts, “a presumption of reasonableness of jurisdiction arises” and “the burden then shifts to the opposing party to prove the assertion of jurisdiction would bé so unreasonable in light of traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice as to overcome the presumption of reasonableness created by the defendant’s minimum contacts with the forum.” de Reyes, 586 So.2d at 107. In determining this fundamental fairness issue, the Irrelevant considerations are: (1) the defendant’s' burden; (2) the forum state’s interest; (3) the plaintiffs interest in convenient and effective relief; (4) the judicial system’s interest in efficient resolution of controversies; and (5) the state’s shared interest in furthering fundamental social policies. Ruckstuhl, 731 So.2d at 890.

Gable’s Minimum Contacts

In reviewing a judgment on an exception of lack of personal jurisdiction, we are mindful that the factual findings underlying the judgment are reviewed for manifest error. Groth v. International Dispensing Systems, Inc., 361 So.2d 1312, 1313 (La.App. 1st Cir.1978). However, the application of the facts to established rules of law is a legal question, and thus, the legal issue of personal jurisdiction over a non-resident by a Louisiana court is subject to de novó review. Id.; Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Babcock Mexico, S.A. de C.V., 597 So.2d 110, 112 (La.App. 4th Cir.1992), writ denied, 600 So.2d 679 (La.1992); Bordelon v. Dehnert, 99-2625 (La. App. 1st Cir.9/22/00), 770 So.2d 433, 438. Because we find, after a review of the record, that there is no dispute as to the facts related to the jurisdictional issue, we review this matter de novo

We first consider whether Gable’s service on the board of directors of USTC, standing alone, is a sufficient contact with Louisiana to support the exercise of personal jurisdiction. The court of appeal relied on Simmons v. Templeton, 96-0592 (La.App. 4th Cir.11/27/96), 684 So.2d 529, in reaching its decision. In Simmons, the Court considered the fact that at least nine states — Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Montana, New Jersey, North Dakota, and South Dakota — include provisions automatically providing for jurisdiction Dover directors of corporations having their principal places of business within the state, even if the corporation is a foreign corporation. Simmons, 684 So.2d at 534. The court stated that “[tjhese ‘automatic’ provisions indicate that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over directors of such corporations comports with fair play and substantial justice and thus does not violate constitutional standards.” Id. The Court further reasoned that although Louisiana’s Long-Arm Statute does not include a similar “automatic” provision, the existence of such provisions in other states is evidence that Louisiana may exercise personal jurisdiction under LSA-R.S. 13:3201(B). Id. We do not find it necessary to rely on the existence of these other states’ provisions in making our decision.

Because Louisiana does not have a specific statutory provision, we must look to the facts and evidence in this case — Gable’s service as a director on the board of USTC, a Louisiana-based company, along with his actions taken in Louisiana while on the board — to determine whether these contacts are sufficient to subject him to the jurisdiction of the Louisiana court.

Gable was heavily involved in the pre-investment investigation of USTC on behalf of his employer, Texaco. Gable was aware, before he voluntarily accepted the position as director, that USTC filed tax returns in Louisiana, that USTC was paying leases on eight towers in Louisiana, that USTC had substantial business in Louisiana, and that USTC had its headquarters in Louisiana. He understood that by accepting a position on the board of directors of a Baton Rouge based company, his duties and responsibility would take him to Louisiana.

Gable testified that he understood that his role on the board was as a|sfiduciary to the USTC shareholders, and to represent their interests, not to represent Texaco’s interests. He viewed his role as assisting the board in making decisions for the benefit of all of the shareholders of USTC. Gable testified that by serving on the board of directors, he had an obligation to the shareholders of USTC.

This writ application primarily involves plaintiffs’ allegations against Gable under Louisiana’s Blue Sky law. Plaintiffs have alleged that the most important transaction giving rise to this suit was the Act of Exchange on September 30, 2001, in which plaintiffs transferred their FCC licenses in exchange for stock in USTC. Louisiana’s Blue Sky law provides that it is unlawful:

to offer to sell or to sell a security by means of any oral or written untrue statement of a material fact or any omission to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading, the buyer not knowing of the untruth or omission, if such person in the exercise of reasonable care could not have known of the untruth or omission.

LSA-R.S. 51:712(B). (Emphasis added). In addition, a director is personally liable for violations of this law. LSAR.S. 51:714(B).

In this case, Plaintiffs have presented evidence of a specific action taken by Gable, in Louisiana, during his tenure on the board, which Plaintiffs allege give rise to their damages. Plaintiffs point to Gable’s presence at a July 24, 2001 meeting in Baton Rouge which was attended by other USTC board members, USTC investors and potential investors. The purpose of that meeting was to discuss USTC’s general intentions regarding development of Louisiana markets, and to solicit support for state involvement from Department of Economic Development Secretary, Don Hutchinson. Les Sladen, President of Southeast Wireless Network (“SEW”) testified that he personally met Gable at the meeting. | flSladen described it as a “working meeting,” where everyone present participated to some extent. Although Gable did not make a presentation on behalf of USTC, the Plaintiffs were aware that he was a director. Sladen testified that two other USTC board members gave presentations at the meeting which contained material misrepresentations relative to the -viability of the company and the state of the company’s technology.. Sladen testified that Gable did not contradict any of .these misrepresentations. Although Sladen testified that there was no “new” information provided in the presentations, the continued misrepresentations led to the September 30, 2001 Act of Exchange between SEW and USTC, which gives rise to this suit.

We find that Gable’s silence at the meeting, his failure to take action to correct any false statements and/or misrepresentations made by his fellow directors, and his failure to disclose the true state of USTC’s affairs to the Plaintiffs, are actions and omissions which, arguably, directly give rise to the Plaintiffs’ damages. Based on this evidence, we find that Gable deliberately engaged in significant activities within Louisiana, and created continuing obligations between himself and Louisiana residents. Thus, we find that Gable purposefully availed himself of the privilege of conducting activities in Louisiana, and it was reasonable for Gable to anticipate the possibility that he may be haled into a Louisiana court as a result of his service on the board. We agree with the conclusion of the court of appeal which held that “[ajccepting such a corporate position is deemed to constitute a manifest decision to avail oneself of the protection of the laws of the forum, and therefore it is not unreasonable to subject such directors to personal jurisdiction in the forum notwithstanding that their Inactions may have been only in their official capacity.”

Fairness — Louisiana Forum

We now address whether minimum requirements inherent in the concept of fair play and substantial justice have been met. A primary concern of this portion of the inquiry is the burden on the nonresident defendant being required to defend a suit in Louisiana. Gable’s testimony does not reveal any substantial burden if he were required to defend this suit in Louisiana. Gable testified that his employer (Texaco) is paying for his legal defense in this matter, and would reimburse any associated travel costs. In addition, he would not lose any salary or income from Texaco for any time missed from work. Gable testified that it would be a personal hardship to be away from his young child, but he admitted that he travels fairly often for Texaco, sometimes being gone for as long as a week at a time.

Further, Louisiana has an interest in adjudicating this dispute because it involves Louisiana transactions which adversely affected Louisiana residents and/or Louisiana companies. The State has a strong public interest in protecting Louisiana residents and companies who purchase securities that are targeted to, and in, Louisiana.

Gable’s minimal burden associated with having to defend this suit in Louisiana does not outweigh these other considerations. Thus, we find that notions of fair play and substantial justice are not offended by requiring Gable to defend this suit in a Louisiana court.

Fiduciary Shield Doctrine

|nWe also reject the application of the “fiduciary shield doctrine” in this case. This doctrine “is rooted in the principle that the acts of a corporate officer in his corporate capacity cannot form the basis for jurisdiction over him in an individual capacity.” Escoto v. U.S. Lending Corporation, 95-2692 (La.App. 4th Cir.5/22/96), 675 So.2d 741, writ denied, 96-1634 (La.9/27/96), 679 So.2d 1343. The doctrine requires a court to look to the individual and personal contacts, if any, of the officer or employee, with the forum state. Escoto, 675 So.2d at 745.

The court in Escoto went on to recognize an exception to the fiduciary shield doctrine, which provides that the fiduciary shield doctrine will not defeat personal jurisdiction where a non-resident corporate agent commits a tort within a forum state which would subject him to personal liability under the laws of that state. Id.

In Escoto, the court held that Louisiana courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant who solicited sales of debentures in Louisiana through registered broker/dealers, despite the fact the nonresident had essentially no personal contacts with the state. Id. at 746. The court’s decision, which rejected the defendant’s assertion of the “fiduciary shield doctrine,” was based in large part on a finding that the defendant could be personally liable for his actions under Louisiana law, and the fact that the defendant purposely availed himself of the privilege of conducting business within the State of Louisiana both because his company sought Louisiana residents as prospective purchasers of its debentures, and because the defendant availed himself of the privilege of soliciting Louisiana residents for the benefit of his corporate employer. Id. The court stated as follows: “[The nonresident defendant] had or should have had sufficient knowledge of Louisiana’s security laws to provide him fair warning that he might |12have personal exposure in the marketing of his corporate employer’s securities in this state. Under these particular circumstances we find that notions of fair play and justice are not offended by requiring [the nonresident defendant’s] presence in a Louisiana court.” Id.

We find the reasoning of Escoto to be applicable here. Given the fact that Gable was a director of a corporation with its principal place of business in Louisiana, he had, or should have had, sufficient knowledge of Louisiana law to know that he could be subject to personal liablity for his aetions/inactions under Louisiana’s Blue Sky law. Despite the fact that Gable’s actions may have been done solely in a corporate capacity, Louisiana, as a means of protecting its citizens, should not permit a director’s wrongdoing in the sale of securities to escape personal responsibility via a corporate shield. See: Escoto, 675 So.2d at 746.

Thus, we adopt the reasoning in Escoto, and hold that the fiduciary shield doctrine is not applicable in this case.

DECREE

For the above reasons, the ruling of the court of appeal is AFFIRMED. The trial court can properly exercise jurisdiction over defendant, James K. Gable.

KIMBALL, J., concurs and assigns reasons.

KIMBALL, Justice,

concurring.

11While I agree with the outcome reached by the majority, I believe the analysis of the fiduciary shield doctrine and the reliance on Escoto v. U.S. Lending Corporation, 95-2692 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/22/96), 675 So.2d 741 are unnecessary. The majority assumes this court has adopted the fiduciary shield doctrine and proceeds to explain why this case represents an exception to it. On the contrary, however, this court has never expressly adopted or applied the fiduciary shield doctrine. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to apply the fiduciary shield doctrine. See Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783, 790, 104 S.Ct. 1482, 1487, 79 L.Ed. 804 (1984) and Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 465 U.S. 770, 781, 104 S.Ct. 1473, 1482, 79 L.Ed. 790 (1984). Instead, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Keeton, 465 U.S. at p. 781, n. 13, 104 S.Ct. 1473, instructs:

In Calder v. Jones, post, at 790[, 104 S.Ct. 1482], we today reject the suggestion that employees who act in their official capacity are somehow shielded from suit in their individual capacity. But jurisdiction over an employee does not automatically follow from jurisdiction over the corporation which employs him; nor does jurisdiction over a parent corporation automatically establish jurisdiction over a wholly owned subsidiary. Each defendant’s contacts with the forum state must be assessed individually. (Citations omitted.)

12While some states continue to apply the fiduciary shield doctrine, I find it unnecessary to do so in Louisiana because the limits of Louisiana’s long-arm statute are coextensive with the limits of constitutional due process. Superior Supply Co., v. Associated Pipe & Supply Co., 515 So.2d 790, 792 (La.1987). Therefore, the inquiry regarding Louisiana’s jurisdiction over a non-resident is an analysis of the constitutional due process requirements. Bridges v. Autozone Property, Inc., 04-0814, p. 26 (La.3/24/05), 900 So.2d 784, 801. If the assertion of jurisdiction satisfies the constitutional due process requirements, then the assertion of jurisdiction satisfies Louisiana’s long-arm statute. Id. Thus, if the fiduciary shield doctrine is not a necessary component of the due process analysis according to the U.S. Supreme Court, it is likewise unnecessary under Louisiana’s long-arm statute. The majority was required to conduct the constitutional due process analysis, but was not required to analyze the fiduciary shield doctrine to resolve this case. Accordingly, I respectfully concur.

      . For purposes of this decision, we will refer to the company as "Texaco.” The specific Texaco entity is not relevant to this writ application.

      . Southeast Wireless Network, Inc. v. U.S. Telemetry Corp., 2005-1536 (La.App. 1st Cir.6/9/06), 938 So.2d 127. (A second nonresident director and named defendant, Charles M. Bruce, also filed an exception the court's jurisdiction. Bruce did not file a writ application in this Court for review of the lower court’s decision).

      . Id. at 131.

      . We note that the trial court did not issue written reasons for its decision.

      . LSA-R.S. 13:3201(B) allows Louisiana courts to exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident on any basis consistent with the constitution of this state and of the Constitution of the United States.

      . SEW is one of the Plaintiff companies.

      . Plaintiffs argue that Gable's actions, taken while serving on the board of USTC, are violations of Louisiana’s Blue Sky law, for which Gable is subject to personal liability.

      . The record also contains additional evidence of other alleged contacts between Gable and Louisiana. We need not analyze those contacts, nor address whether they are sufficient to subject Gable to personal jurisdiction of the Louisiana courts. We find that Gable's service on the board of USTC, a corporation with its principal place of business in Louisiana, in addition to Gable's actions at the July 24, 2001 meeting in Baton Rouge, are sufficient contacts to subject Gable to the jurisdiction of the Louisiana court in this case.

      . See also 79 A.L.R.5th 587 § 2(a), which states:
      Although courts previously questioned whether the fiduciary shield doctrine exists as an element of federal due process or as a state law doctrine, it is for the most part presently viewed as a state law doctrine which functions as a tool for courts to apply in determining the scope of the state’s long-arm statutes.

      . See also 79 A.L.R.5& 587 § 2(b), which states:
      It has been held that if a state’s long-arm statute allows jurisdiction to the extent permitted by the Federal Constitution, employing the fiduciary shield to insulate employees is inconsistent with the wide reach of the statute, and in such a jurisdiction, the jurisdictional question becomes whether the court’s exercise of jurisdiction accords with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and not whether the fiduciary shield doctrine bars jurisdiction.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    ARC INDUSTRIES, L.L.C. v. William H. NUNGESSER.
    No. 2007-CC-0311.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Nungesser, William'H.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. I, No.'2006-3028-1; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 06-01353.

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


text:
    STATE ex rel. Edwin J. STARK v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1457.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Edwin J. Stark, Applying for Rehearing of this Court’s Order dated February 16, 2007; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. J., No. 391-426; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2005-K-0588.

Rehearing denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jonathon Lee SMITH, a/k/a Jonathon Louis Smith, Chavis C. Grant and Quincy Hill.
    No. 2006-K-2179.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 238,578; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 40,894-KA.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    James M. LEBLANC, James L. Rogers and Nathan B. Cain v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF LOUISIANA STATE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM.
    No. 2007-CC-0393.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re LeBlanc, James M. et al.; Cain, Nathan B.; Rogers, James L.; — Plaintiff/s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 542,775; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CW 1870.

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


text:
    In re GRAMERCY PLANT EXPLOSION AT KAISER.
    No. 2007-OC-0544.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Thomas & Betts Corp.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. James, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. D, Nos. 25,975, 26,542, 26,865, 26,821; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No(s). 06-CA-874, 06-CA-871, 06-CA-873, 06-CA-872.

Stay denied. Writ denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    Denny DYER, Pro Se v. Richard STALDER, Secretary Department of Corrections; O. Kent Andrews, Warden Allen Correctional Center; Priscilla Pitre, Records Analyst/Time Computator Allen Correctional Center; C. Maxwell, Records Analyst/Time Computator Hunt Correctional Center; and S. Ardoin, Records Analyst/Time Computator C. Paul Phelps Correctional Center.
    No. 2006-CI-1548.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Dyer, Denny; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 521,163; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 CA 0454.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Nathan WILLIAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1750.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Williams, Nathan; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 230,576; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 40,-866-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael D. EZELL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1751.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Ezell, Michael D.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Tensas, 6th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 64795; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41501-KH.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Barry Jude DIGGS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1752.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Diggs, Barry Jude; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 359887; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0293.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Dawn D. BENNETT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1753.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Bennett, Dawn D.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Livingston, 21st Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 16937; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2004 KA 1215.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Antoinette HOLMES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1756.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Holmes, Antoinette; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 97-6759; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-328.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; 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. Andrew EDWARDS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1762.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Edwards, Andrew; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 03-01-238; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0463.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Luis GARCIA v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1765.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Garcia, Luis; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 01-158,660; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0262.

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 ex rel. Frederick WILBERT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1768.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Wilbert, Frederick; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 97-2116; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-350.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Charles N. SIMON, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1769.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Simon, Charles N. Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 45632; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 05-01371.

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. Carroll Wayne HAYNES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1778.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Haynes, Carroll Wayne; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberia, 16th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 44628; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 06-00228.

Denied. Untimely and repetitive. La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jason BAUDOIN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1781.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Baudoin, Jason; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Martin, 16th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 97-181,960; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 06-00326.

Denied. State ex rel. Bernard v. Cr.D.C., 94-2247, p. 1 (La.4/28/95), 653 So.2d 1174, 1175.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Archie HARRISON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1782.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Harrison, Archie; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 08-89-1318; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0336.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694.


text:
    STATE ex rel. John E. LUCAS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1783.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Lucas, John E.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Plaquemines, 25th Judicial District Court Div. A, Nos. 99-3373, 99-4664; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-0597.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; 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. Anthony ARMSTRONG v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1793.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Armstrong, Anthony; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 82-953; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 06-00465.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.

KNOLL, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Shannon ALEXANDER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1794.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Alexander, Shannon; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 96-1508; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH^24.

Denied. State ex rel. Bernard v. Cr.D.C., 94-2247, p. 1 (La.4/28/95), 653 So.2d 1174, 1175.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jearl PLUNKETT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1800.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Plunkett, Jearl; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Webster, 26th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 63482; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No(s). 41492-KH, 41317-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Preston DEMOUCHET, Jr.
    No. 2006-KH-1806.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Demouchet, Preston Jr.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 31,681; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH06-870.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Ruben J. ANDERSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1809.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Anderson, Ruben J.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 443-293; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-0520.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Harry James JONES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1810.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Jones, Harry James; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Richland, 5th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. F2004-52; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No(s). 41461-KH, 41321-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Mirodello ASHFORD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1811.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Ashford, Mirodello; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 431-692; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-0587.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jeremy TODD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1813.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Todd, Jeremy; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, Nos. 348931, 348932; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0694.

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. Randall GRAHAM v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1826.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Graham, Randall; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberville, 18th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 3168-99; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0565.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Dewayne F. WILLIAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1942.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Williams, Dewayne F.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Morehouse, 4th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 2003-F971; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41554-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Dedrick Laron ZACKARY.
    No. 2006-KK-2027.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson Davis, 31st Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. CR-585-05; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 06-00581.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.

KNOLL, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Virginia DOWNS.
    No. 2006-K-2158.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Downs, Virginia; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 01-04-0699; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0919.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Courtney MOSES.
    No. 2006-KO-2171.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Moses, Courtney; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 96-0372; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 05-KA-787.

Denied.


text:
    MUNDAY/ELKINS AUTOMOTIVE PARTNERS, LTD. dba Elkins Nissan v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. aka UPS Logistics Group aka UPS World Wide Logistics and Larry Henderson.
    No. 2007-CC-0128.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Henderson, Larry; United Parcel Service Inc. a/k/a UPS Logistics Group a/k/a UPS Worldwide Logistics; — Defendants); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 486,934; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41691-CW.

Denied.


text:
    ST. MARY OPERATING COMPANY v. Lester Joseph CHAMPAGNE, et al.
    No. 2007-C-0301.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Romero, Irene Marie; Frederick, Mary; Champagne, Lester Joseph et al.; Luquette, Ricky D.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Vermilion, 15th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 82422-D; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-984.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant.


author: KNOLL, J.,

text:
    Ronald K. CHAVERS, et al. v. BRIGHT TRUCK LEASING, et al.
    No. 2007-C-0304.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Chavers, Ronald K. et al.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 96-1119-A; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1011.

Denied.

KNOLL, J.,

would grant on issue pertaining to summary judgment in favor of Associates and deny the issue pertaining to subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims against Reliance.


text:
    CITY OF MINDEN v. Carolyn Sale Warren MCDANIEL and Graceland Gardens City of Minden v. Timothy Lee Kennedy, Kelly Bays Kennedy, and Graceland Gardens City of Minden v. The Jeannine Sale Miller Living Trust, Dr. Mark D. Miller and Graceland Gardens.
    No. 2007-C-0369.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Graceland Gardens; McDaniel, Carolyn Sale Warren et al.; Kennedy, Kelly Bays; Miller, Mark D. Dr.; Kennedy, Timothy Lee; Jeannine Sale Miller Living Trust; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Webster, 26th Judicial District Court Div. B, Nos. 65,476, 65,478, 65,480; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No(s). 41,372-CA, 41,370-CA, 41,371-CA.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    PARKVIEW BAPTIST CHURCH AND SCHOOL and Church Mutual Insurance Company v. Jordan WHITE and Lam D. Hoang, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-0377.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Church Mutual Insurance Company; Parkview Baptist Church and School; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 509,408; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CW 1942.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.

WEIMER, J., would grant.


text:
    In re EDC CONTRACTOR INSURANCE LITIGATION.
    No. 2007-CC-0378.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Continental Casualty Company;— Other; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 98-1984; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 06-01427.

Denied.


text:
    II FIRE RECORDS, L.L.C. v. Derren CLOUDEN p/k/a “Mr. Wicked”, Forefront Entertainment L.L.C. and Inner City Productions L.L.C.
    No. 2007-C-0392.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re II Fire Records, L.L.C.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 03-5979; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-CA-0763.

Denied.


text:
    Robert J. NEIL v. Ronald ELLENDER, Lawrence Ellender, Jr., James J. Thames, Estate of Carl Ellender, Jr., Patricia Boudreaux, Estate of Lawrence Ellender, Sr., David Chauvin, Loretta Ellender Tanner, Ruby Ellender Portener and Louisiana Employment Security Federal.
    No. 2007-C-0395.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Neil, Robert J.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 131941; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 CA 1494.

Denied.


text:
    Kathleen TRIVETTE v. STATE of Louisiana, OFFICE OF GROUP BENEFITS.
    No. 2007-C-0396.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Trivette, Kathleen; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. O, No. 519728; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 CA 2245.

Denied.


text:
    Susan ARONSON v. John T. CONBOY, LCSW and Our Lady of the Lake Hospital, Inc.
    No. 2007-CC-0397.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Our Lady of the Lake Hospital Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 520,417; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CW 2087.

Denied.


text:
    Tara WEINSTEIN and David Weinstein, Individually and on Behalf of His Two Minor Daughters, Lindsay Weinstein and Allie Weinstein v. Roger F. SHAW and American National General Insurance Company.
    No. 2007-CC-0402.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re American National Property and Casualty Company; ANPAC Louisiana Insurance Company; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 523-703; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CW 0484.

Denied.


text:
    Nicole SCOTT v. DEPARTMENT OF POLICE.
    No. 2007-C-0406.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Scott, Nicole; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, New Orleans Civil Service Commission, No. 7269; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-CA-0956.

Denied.


text:
    Dave BEACH v. PETER SCALFANO ENTERPRISES, et al.
    No. 2007-C-0408.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Beach, Dave; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 220,8S7-F; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1139.

Denied.


text:
    Jerome FREELAND v. Ernest BOURGEOIS, et al.
    No. 2007-C-0409.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Coregis Insurance Company; Cal-casieu Parish School Board; Bourgeois, Ernest et ah; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 02-4793; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-932.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    Ricky Wayne GASPARD, Jr. v. KIVA CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING, INC., et al.
    No. 2007-CC-0410.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re XL Specialty Insurance Co.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 109,397; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CW 2412.

Denied.


text:
    Evano Joseph CHAISSON, Jr., Sharon Marie Chaisson Duffourc and Belinda Ann Delaune Pauli v. AVONDALE INDUSTRIES, INC., Formerly Known as Avondale Shipyards, Inc., Garlock, Inc., Uniroyal, Inc., Eagle, Inc., Formerly Known as Eagle Asbestos and Packing Co., Inc., Reilly-Benton Company, Inc., et al.
    No. 2007-C-0411.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re H.B. Zachry Company; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. A, No. 2002-5898; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2005-CA-1511.

Denied.


text:
    BREMERMANN MECHANICAL, INC. and Francis and Jacqueline Bremermann v. CITY OF KENNER.
    No. 2007-C-0414.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Kenner, City of; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. O, No. 629-010; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-CA-703.

Denied.


text:
    Odessia WILLIAMS v. Vernes KEELER, Jr., v. Keeler & Company, Inc., and Progressive Casualty Company.
    No. 2007-C-0415.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Williams, Odessia; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 2004-16923; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-CA-0764.

Denied.


text:
    CAJUN CONSTRUCTORS, INC. v. FLEMING CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. and Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America.
    No. 2007-C-0420.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Fleming Construction Co. Inc.;— Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 502,747; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 CA 2003.

Denied.


text:
    Garrett Linn LEBLANC v. Nichole LEBLANC.
    No. 2007-C-0562.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re LeBlanc, Garrett Linn; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 2003-4629; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1052.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana in the Interest of C.J.
    No. 2007-CJ-0579.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Bergeron, Morris; Whalen, Cynthia; — Other(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Livingston, 21st Judicial District Court Div.. D, No. 10223; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CJ 1441.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Dewayne WILLIAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0591.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Williams, Dewayne; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Mandamus and/or Writ of Prohibition, Parish of Morehouse, 4th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 03-971F; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42225-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Robert Earl JONES.
    No. 2007-KH-0593.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Jones, Robert; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 334151; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1686.

Denied.


text:
    Kaylem MATHERNE, Jimmy McGuire and William Hughes v. KELLOGG BROWN & ROOT, INC., et al.
    No. 2007-CC-0354.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 5, 2007.
   In re Matherne, Kaylem et ah; McGuire, Jimmy; Hughes, William;— Plaintiff(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 61,713; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-C-30.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., would grant.


text:
    Bruce L. FEINGERTS v. AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PA.
    No. 2007-CC-0655.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 19, 2007.
   In re American Casualty Company of Reading PA; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs Office of Workers’ Comp. Dist. 8, No. 03-01073; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-C-0304.

Denied.


text:
    Jace BONURA v. KAPPA SIGMA FRATERNITY, Mu Omega Chapter of the Kappa Sigma Fraternity, and Steadfast Insurance Company.
    No. 2007-CC-0792.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 19, 2007.
   In re Bonura, Jace; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 2001-003156; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 0427.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    In re Marion ELLIOTT.
    No. 2007-CC-0236.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Haygood, Gary Stephen D.D.S. d/b/a; Miss-Lou Family Dental Center;— Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Concor-dia, 7th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 41050; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 06-01440.

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


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Hurley MCDONALD.
    No. 2007-KH-0676.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re McDonald, Hurley; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 461-303.

Granted for the sole purpose of transferring the filing to the district court for its consideration under La. C. Cr. P. art. 701(F). The district court is directed to provide this Court with a copy of its ruling.


text:
    Mary Evelyn SMITH v. Jamie Dale SMITH.
    No. 2007-CJ-0621.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Smith, Jamie Dale; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 01-3746; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,-871-CA.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    Richard J. MURRAY, Jr. et ux. v. TOWN OF MANSURA, et al.
    No. 2006-C-2949.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   Richard J Murray, Jr. And Barbara D. Murray, applying for Reconsideration to this court’s action dated January 12, 2007 from Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court Division B, No. 538-005, Third Circuit Court of Appeal No. 06-355.

Not considered. See Supreme Court Rule IX. Section 6.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Bertram A. YOUNG v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2005-KH-2171.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Young, Bertram A.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 332025 B; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 KW 0793.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Glenn BRUMFIELD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1579.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Brumfield, Glenn; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, Nos. 00-5362, 03-2741; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 05-KH-981.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jill MILLER.
    No. 2006-KP-1708.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Miller, Jill; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 98-CR2-73280; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0482.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Winston M. WEBSTER.
    No. 2006-KK-1772.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Webster, Winston M.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of W. Baton Rouge, 18th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 13506; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0583.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Danny Ray GRAY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1828.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Gray, Danny Ray; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 284029; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0716.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; 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. David READO v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1832.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Reado, David; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 1850-81.

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. James Derrick JONES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1836.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Jones, James Derrick; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 49,282; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41515-KH.

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. Roger PALMER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1837.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Palmer, Roger; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Beauregard, 36th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. CR377-95; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 06-00246.

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. Michael COMPTON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1838.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Compton, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 99-809; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-412.

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. Timothy CRADDOCK v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1840.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Craddock, Timothy; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 364-781; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 KW 2730.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Norris JAMES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1841.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re James, Norris; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 280-922.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Eric PETRY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1842.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Petry, Eric; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Vermilion, 15th Judicial District Court Div. J, Nos. 26759, 25914; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 06-00479.

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. Clyde R. JOSEPH, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1843.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Joseph, Clyde R. Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberville, 18th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 2141-96; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0715.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael CORMIER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1880.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Cormier, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 82537; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 05-01330.

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. James ADAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1881.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Adams, James; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 89-2118; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-413.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Phillip LANDE.
    No. 2006-K-1894.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Lande, Phillip; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 03^4759; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KA-24.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Trinity VITRANO v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1898.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Vitrano, Trinity; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Plaquemines, 25th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 98-0820; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-0502.

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. Kenny WHITMORE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1900.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Whitmore, Kenny; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 05-75-8614.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694.


text:
    Jesse J. CASTON v. Richard L. STALDER, et al.
    No. 2006-CI-1901.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Caston, Jesse J.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 516,669; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 CA 1288.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jimmy WASHINGTON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1921.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Washington, Jimmy; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 204,532; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41319-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Anthony MARTIN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1922.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Martin, Anthony; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 379-125; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-0531.

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. Don HUNT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1923.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Hunt, Don; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Bernard, 34th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 283-174; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-0652.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Wallace CARTER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1931.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Carter, Wallace; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 321840; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0695.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. James FRANCIS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1932.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Francis, James; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 91-216; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-504.

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. Gary MATHEWS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1936.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Mathews, Gary; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 303250; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0489.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Lee PARKER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1937.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Parker, Lee; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 308-170; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2005-K-0970.

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 ex rel. Gregory SATCHEF v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1938.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Satchef, Gregory; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 93-8208; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 05-KH-797.

Denied. Repetitive and not cognizable on collateral review. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172; cf. La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Charles J. GRIFFIN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1939.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Griffin, Charles J.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 436-232; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-0632.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael COMPTON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-1950.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In Re Compton, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 99-809; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-455.

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 of Louisiana v. Mark T. CAMBRE.
    No. 2006-K-2121.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Cambre, Mark T.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 03-4506; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 05-KA-888.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Pamela Darlene TEMPLET.
    No. 2006-K-2203.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Templet, Pamela Darlene; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Livingston, 21st Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 18782; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 KA 2623.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michelle C. LITTLEFIELD.
    No. 2006-K-2213.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Littlefield, Michelle C.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 393929; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 KA 2437.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Donald David HANSON.
    No. 2006-KO-2318.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Hanson, Donald David; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 222,618; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,195-KA.

Denied on showing made.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Troy GORDEN.
    No. 2006-KO-2319.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Gorden, Troy; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 99-0847; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KA-8.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Aaron C. WILSON.
    No. 2006-K-2323.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Wilson, Aaron C.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 213,012; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 40,767-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael COMPTON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-2567.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Compton, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 99-809; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06 KH 712.

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. Michael COMPTON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-2950.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Compton, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 943560; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-847.

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:
    TIGERLAND TRUCK STOP & CASINO, L.L.C. v. TOWN OF ST. GABRIEL, Louisiana.
    No. 2007-C-0210.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Tigerland Truck Stop & Casino L.L.C.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Iber-ville, 18th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 60,845; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 0793.

Denied.


text:
    Deedra COMEAUX v. LAFAYETTE GENERAL MEDICAL CENTER.
    No. 2007-C-0289.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Comeaux, Deedra; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 2005-1199-K; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-0810.

Denied.


text:
    Larry CURTIS, et al. v. BRANTON INDUSTRIES, INC. et al. Claude Willis and Bessie Willis v. Combustion Engineering, Inc. et al.
    No. 2007-C-0291.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.;— Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. F, Nos. 202,-561,174,247; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No(s). 06-675, 06-676.

Denied.


text:
    Nelson HUGHES, Sr., Administrator of the Succession of Charlotte Lathers Hughes v. Deborah Ann ROBERTSON and Hancock Bank of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-CC-0292.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Hancock Bank of Louisiana; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Helena, 21st Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 19109; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CW 2064.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., would grant the writ.

WEIMER, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Thomas J. AVERETTE v. The BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-0293.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Transportation & Devi. Dept, of; Louisiana State of; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 83,444; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 06-01345.

Denied.


text:
    Larry CURTIS, et al. v. BRANTON INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.
    No. 2007-C-0295.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Zurn Industries Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 174,247; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-675.

Denied.

KIMBALL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Larry CURTIS, et al. v. BRANTON INDUSTRIES, INC. et al.
    No. 2007-C-0296.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Zurn Industries Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 202,561; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-676.

Denied.

KIMBALL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Larry CURTIS, et al. v. BRANTON INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.
    No. 2007-C-0297.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Andritz Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 174,247; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No(s). 06-676, 06-675.

Denied.

KIMBALL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Claude WILLIS and Bessie Willis v. COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC., et al.
    No. 2007-C-0298.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Andritz, Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 202,561; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-676.

Denied.

KIMBALL, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Ernestine LEE v. COMMODORE HOLDINGS, LTD.
    No. 2007-C-0300.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Lee, Ernestine; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 99-9227; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2000-CA-1551.

Denied.


text:
    Debra RUFFIN and Dianne Joseph v. POLAND ENTERPRISES, L.L.C., Department of Social Services and Division of Administration.
    No. 2007-C-0314.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Department of Social Services & Division of Administration; State of Louisiana; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. A, No. 04-16536; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-CA-0244.

Denied.


text:
    John and Jane DOE, et al. v. SACRED HEART CATHOLIC SCHOOL, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-0360.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re LaBranehe Duck Club; — Third Party; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 99-13971 and other consolidated cases; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-C-1351.

Denied.


text:
    Hansen Lance AYERS v. Governor Kathleen Babineaux BLANCO et al.
    No. 2007-CP-0365.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Ayers, Hansen Lance; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. C548563.

Denied on showing made.


text:
    In the Matter of the MASHBURN MARITAL TRUSTS In the Matter of the Mashburn Family Trust.
    No. 2007-C-0403.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Mashburn, Timothy R.; — Other; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. G, Nos. 2001-003363, 71685; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No(s). 2006 CA 1753, 2006 CA 1754.

Denied.


text:
    Florence Wilkins WHITE, Larry Joe White, Willie Mae White Holcomb, Willie Earl White, and Jackie Denise White v. SHELL EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION COMPANY, Shell Offshore Inc., Steve’s Welding Service and Steve Lasserre.
    No. 2007-C-0407.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Steve’s Welding Service; Las-serre, Steve; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 610-857; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-CA-677.

Denied.


text:
    Erskine WRIGHT v. Dr. Robert HONEGGER and Meadowcrest Hospital.
    No. 2007-CC-0412.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Meadowcrest Hospital; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 625-620; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-C-961.

Denied.


text:
    Joycelyn Jenna SHAW v. WASHINGTON PARISH SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT and Aubrey Jones, Sheriff of Washington Parish.
    No. 2007-C-0416.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Shaw, Joycelyn Jenna; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 84,734; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 CA 2288.

Denied.


text:
    PARK PROPERTIES, L.L.C. v. METAL WORKS OF NEW ORLEANS, L.L.C.; GBII, L.L.C.; 1021 Development, L.L.C.; Glade B. Bilby, II; James V. St. Raymond; and Thomas J. Long.
    No. 2007-C-0424.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Metal Works of New Orleans L.L.C. et al.; GBII L.L.C.; 1021 Development L.L.C.; St. Raymond, James V.; Bil-by, Glade B. II; Long, Thomas J.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. L, No. 03-15057; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-CA-0702.

Denied.


text:
    Florence Wilkins WHITE, Larry Joe White, Willie Mae White Holcomb, Willie Earl White, and Jackie Denise White v. SHELL EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION COMPANY, Shell Offshore Inc., Steve’s Welding Service and Steve Lasserre.
    No. 2007-C-0440.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re White, Florence Wilkins et al.; White, Larry Joe; Holcomb, Willie Mae White; White, Willie Earl; White, Jackie Denise; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 610-857; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-CA-677.

Denied.


text:
    Sondra LAWRENCE v. CITY OF SHREVEPORT.
    No. 2007-C-0441.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Shreveport City of; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 493,212B; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,825-CA.

Denied.


text:
    Johnny BRUMFIELD v. ANTHONY TIMBERLANDS, INC.
    No. 2007-CC-0444.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Anthony Timberlands Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs Office of Workers’ Comp. Dist. 2, No. 05-00780; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. WCW 06-01491.

Denied.


text:
    In the Matter of the MASHBURN MARITAL TRUSTS In the Matter of the Mashburn Family Trust and In the Matter of the Mashburn Family Trust.
    No. 2007-C-0446.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Penton, Helen Mashburn; — Other; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. G, Nos. 2001-003368, 71,685; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No(s). 2006 CA 0741, 2005 CW 0887, 2006 CA 0742.

Denied.


text:
    Erskine WRIGHT v. Dr. Robert HONEGGER and Meadowcrest Hospital.
    No. 2007-CC-0447.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Honegger, Robert Dr. et al;— Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 625-620; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-C-39.

Denied.


text:
    John HOVER and Jennifer Hover v. Irina LICCARDI and Turner Professional Services, Ltd.
    No. 2007-CC-0466.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Turner Professional Services LTD.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. P, No. 599,057; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-C-62.

Denied.


text:
    Irene Antoinette Noel WIEDEMANN v. Lawrence D. WIEDEMANN.
    No. 2007-CC-0470.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Wiedemann, Lawrence D.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 628-849; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-C-104.

Denied.


text:
    MARSH ENGINEERING, INC. and Richard D. Barnett v. Earnest L. PARKER, et al.
    No. 2007-C-0472.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Barnett, Richard D.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 91-5553; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1137.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., Recused.


text:
    Jeanne N. SCHWAB v. Dr. Ira P. MARKOWITZ, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-0473.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Touro Infirmary; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. I, No. 2001-5890; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-C-1661.

Denied.


text:
    Janet LONDON v. STATE of Louisiana, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION, Seth Keener, Jr., Robert McCardle, Ann Wax and Karen Jackson.
    No. 2007-C-0475.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re State of Louisiana Division of Administration et al.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 464950; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 0872.

Denied.


text:
    Carla SOWELL v. PROCESS EQUIPMENT.
    No. 2007-C-0482.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Process Equipment; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Comp. Dist. 02, No. 05-00452; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1198.

Denied.


text:
    David H. FOSHEE and Lori S. Foshee v. LOUISIANA FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY and Steven F. Bates.
    No. 2007-C-0483.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Foshee, David H. et al.; Foshee, Lori S.; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Winn, 8th Judicial District Court Div. O, No. 38,119-03; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,842-CA.

Denied.


text:
    Kim Schlosser TUMMINELLO, et al. v. COLUMBIA LAKESIDE HOSPITAL, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-0487.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Tumminello, Kim Schlosser et al.; Tumminello, Tim;- — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 549-798; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-C-953.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Craig LONDON & Brandon Robertson.
    No. 2007-KK-0489.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re Robertson, Brandon; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 2002-5336; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-K-948.

Denied.


text:
    State in the Interest of S.N.F.
    No. 2007-CJ-0648.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 20, 2007.
   In re J.L.F.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. JC-2004-0739; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1289.

Denied.


author: FREDERICKA HOMBERG WICKER, Judge.

text:
    Kevin B. MURRAY and Todd St. Cyr v. CITY OF HARAHAN.
    No. 06-CA-737.
    Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 27, 2007.
    John J. Messina, Attorney at Law, Ken-ner, Louisiana, for Plaintiff/Appellant.
    Thomas P. Anzelmo, Sr., Andre J. La-garde, Attorneys at Law, Metairie, Louisiana, for Defendant/Appellee.
    Panel composed of Judges WALTER J. ROTHSCHILD, FREDERICKA HOMBERG WICKER, and GREG G. GUIDRY.
   FREDERICKA HOMBERG WICKER, Judge.

|aThe judgment on review in this appeal is a grant of a defense exception of prescription and the dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

Plaintiffs, Kevin Murray and Todd St. Cyr, have been employed as full time firefighters for the City of Kenner since 1974 and 1988 respectively. On December 18, 2001, the men filed a petition for damages alleging the City of Harahan (Harahan) failed to enroll in the Firefighters’ Retirement System (FRS) as mandated by La. R.S. 11:2251 et seq., causing plaintiffs to lose substantial retirement benefits.

Specifically, the petition alleges that, prior to the enactment of La. R.S.11:2252 et seq., Harahan was a participant in the Municipal Employees’ Retirement System of -Louisiana (MERSA) until it arbitrarily withdrew in October of 1985. Harahan did not enroll in FRS until September 1, 1998. Plaintiffs allege |sHarahan did not notify the firefighters of its failure to participate in the FRS when the statute was enacted. Consequently, no contributions to their retirement were made during the interim period.

Harahan responded with an answer, affirmative defenses and peremptory exceptions, including no cause of action and prescription. In support of its exceptions, Harahan argued that it did not have the duty to enroll an employee in FRS until the legislature enacted La. R.S. 11:2270, effective July 1, 1995, which provided that the enrollment process shall be complete by December 31, 1995. Therefore, plaintiffs’ claims are for lost monetary contributions between January 1, 1996, and August 31, 1998 when both men were enrolled in FRS. Further, Harahan reasons, since claims for unpaid compensation are subject to a liberative prescription period of three years pursuant to La.C.C. art. 3494, this suit filed in December of 2001 is prescribed. These exceptions were denied by the trial court on May 23, 2002.

Discovery continued and Harahan re-urged its exception of prescription asserting that both plaintiffs testified in their depositions that they learned of their right to participate in FRS in 1995 or 1996, and enrolled on September 1, 1998. Because this action was filed in December of 2001, Harahan again asserted that the matter had prescribed. After a hearing on the matter, the trial court granted Harahan’s exception of prescription and dismissed the matter with prejudice. It is that judgment from which plaintiffs appeal.

On the trial of the peremptory exception prior to the trial of the case, evidence may be introduced to support or controvert any of the objections plead, when the grounds thereof do not appear from the petition. La. C.C.P. art. 931.

The arguments of counsel at trial and in brief to this Court do not question the evidence used to support the exception. Rather, the arguments relate to the | ¿correct statutory prescriptive period applicable to this matter. In support of its exception of prescription, Harahan argues that the three year liberative prescriptive period provided by La. C.C. art. 3494 is applicable. Article 3494 provides in pertinent part as follows:

The following actions are subject to a liberative prescription of three years:
(1) An action for the recovery of compensation for services rendered, including payment of salaries, wages, commissions, tuition fees, professional fees, fees and emoluments of public officials, freight, passage, money, lodging, and board;.

La. C.C. art. 3495 provides:

. This prescription commences to run from the day payment is exigible. It accrues as to past due payments even if there is a continuation of labor, supplies, or other services.

Harahan argues that the amount of damages sued for by plaintiffs constitutes wages and is therefore subject to the prescriptive period of article 3494. Harahan relies on Fishbein v. State ex rel. Louisiana State University Health Science Center, 04-2482 (La.4/12/05), 898 So.2d 1260 for support of its position.

Plaintiffs counter with two arguments presented in the alternative. They argue first that their claim is not one for wages; but rather, it is a personal action for breach of a fiduciary duty arising from the failure of Harahan to follow the statutory mandate of La. R.S. 11:2251 et seq. In the alternative, plaintiffs argue that, since they have not yet retired, the claim is not exigi-ble and prescription has not yet begun to run.

In making the decision to grant the exception of prescription, the trial court relied on Fishbein, finding the claim is exigi-ble, and prescription began to run when the plaintiffs discovered they were entitled to enroll in FRS. By deposition, both plaintiffs admitted that discovery was in 1995 or 1996, they were both enrolled on September 1, 1998, and this suit was filed on December 18, 2001.

|sIn Fishbein, a doctor employed by Louisiana State University Medical Center, brought an action to have her employer consider her supplemental salary in the calculation of her retirement compensation. She argued that the claim became exibible at the time of her retirement and further that the action was a personal action subject to a ten year prescriptive period. The Supreme Court, reversing a decision of the appellate court, disagreed. The Fishbein court held that contributions to retirement plans are a form of deferred compensation and are subject to the three year prescriptive period found in La. C.C. art. 3494. Id. 897 So.2d at 1266. In so ruling, the court found that, although there was a contractual relationship between Dr. Fishbein and LSU, the action against the employer did not arise out of the contractual relationship and was not governed by La. C.C. art. 3499.

The Fishbein court relied on Grabert v. Iberia Parish School Board, 93-2715 (La.7/5/94), 638 So.2d 645. In Grabert, the plaintiffs brought suit for breach of contract against their employer under a four-year employment contract for recovery of past due wages. As the Grabert court explained:

. Breach of contract is not a free standing cause of action. It is a legal premise, or principle, which gives rise to the right to claim some substantive remedy at law. Here that remedy is the recovery of past due wages. Id., 638 So.2d at 646

Using the analysis of Grabert, the Fish-bein court found that Dr. Fishbein’s claim was one for recovery of compensation for services rendered and subject to the three year prescriptive period.

Further, the Fishbein court found the prescriptive period commenced to run pursuant to La. C.C. art. 3495 when Dr. Fish-bein learned that the compensation used for the calculation of retirement benefits did not include supplemental pay.

| fiPlaintiffs argue that Fishbein is not applicable and assert that their claim is governed by La. R.S. 11:2262(D)(2), which provides that delinquent payments due by the employer of the firemen can be made current. In support of their position, the plaintiffs cite Foti v. Board of Trustees, 01-1324 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/10/02), 817 So.2d 233 and Mastio v. Firefighters Pension & Relief Fund, 93-1881 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/26/94), 637 So.2d 1262; writ denied, 94-1676 (La.10/7/94), 644 So.2d 638.

We are not persuaded by the plaintiffs’ argument. La. R.S. 11:2262(D) in pertinent part provides as follows:

D. Pension accumulation fund
The pension accumulation fund shall be the fund in which shall be accumulated all reserves for the payment of all pensions and benefits payable from contributions made by employers. Contributions to and payments from the pension accumulation fund shall be made as follows:
(1) In addition to the assessment collected above, each municipality, parish, or fire protection district which has employees on its fire protection force who become members in the Firefighters’ Retirement System shall contribute an amount equal to nine percent of the earnable compensation excluding overtime but including state supplemental pay, of each firefighter eligible for membership in the Firefighters’ Retirement System and shall remit this amount monthly to the Firefighters’ Retirement System.
(2) Delinquent payments due under R.S. 11:2262(B)(1) and 2262(D)(1) may, with interest at the rate of six percent per annum, be recovered by action in a court of competent jurisdiction against the political subdivision or instrumentality liable therefor or such amounts shall, upon due certification of delinquency and at the request of the Firefighters’ Retirement System, be deducted from any other monies payable to such subdivision or instrumentality by any department or agency of the state.

The above cited statute sets up the pension fund for the accumulation of payments made by both the firefighters and their employers. Clearly, under this statute Harahan is obligated to contribute to this fund on behalf of both plaintiffs once they enrolled in the system. Further, the action for delinquent payments provided inures to the benefit of FRS.

|7In the matter before us there is no assertion that the appropriate funds were not deposited by Harahan since the plaintiffs’ enrolled in 1998, nor is there any suggestion that FRS has taken any action to collect delinquent funds from Harahan. Thus, we do not find La. R.S. 11:2262(D)(2) applicable.

Plaintiffs also argue that Fishbein is distinguishable, and that this court should apply the holdings of Mastio v. Firefighters’ Pension & Relief Fund, supra, and Foti v. Board of Trustees, supra.

We do not agree with plaintiffs’ contention. In Mastio, a disabled firefighter appealed the denial of his request for an increase in his benefits. The Mastio court applied the ten year prescriptive period, although the issue of its applicability was not raised. In Foti, a panel of this court applied the ten year period to a similar appeal from a disability-related pension issue. Both cases involve the recovery of disability benefits, rather then claims related to the payment of contributions into the retirement system.

Finding no merit in plaintiffs’ arguments, we find that the trial court correctly applied Fishbein and granted the exception of prescription. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the trial court.

AFFIRMED.