author: JOHNSON, Justice. VICTORY, J., dissenting.

text:
    Kimberly and Todd THIBODEAUX, Individually and on behalf of their Minor Child, Gabrielle Thibodeaux v. James DONNELL, M.D.
    No. 2008-C-2436.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 5, 2009.
    Rehearing Denied May 29, 2009.

      Blue Williams, Carl Theodore Conrad, Mandeville, Norval J. Rhodes, for applicant.
    Kraft Gatz Lane Benjamin, Ralph Edward Kraft, Frederick Douglas Gatz, Jr., Bryan Edward Lege, Lewis Kullman, Sterbcow & Abramson, Paul M. Sterbcow, New Orleans, for respondent.
    Amy Waters Phillips, Baton Rouge, and Marc W. Judice, Lafayette, for amicus curiae, Louisiana State Medical Society.
    David Alva Woodridge, Jr., amicus curiae, for Louisiana Patient’s Comp. Fund Oversight Bd.
   JOHNSON, Justice.

| We granted this writ application to determine whether the court of appeal correctly interpreted La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3) to require that notice of a medical review panel’s dissolution be sent to the claimant or his attorney in order to trigger the running of the ninety-day period terminating the suspension of the prescriptive period, where the medical review panel has not rendered a decision, and no court-ordered extension of time was obtained. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the court of appeal.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff, Kimberly Thibodeaux, presented to defendant, Dr. James Donnell, as a pregnancy patient in 2008. In October of 2003, Mrs. Thibodeaux was diagnosed with complete placenta previa. Mrs. Thibo-deaux was admitted to Terrebonne General Hospital on November 13, 2003, for treatment for vaginal bleeding [¡¡secondary to the placenta previa, and she remained hospitalized until November 17, 2003. Mrs. Thibodeaux was readmitted to Terre-bonne General Hospital with renewed vaginal bleeding and contractions on November 19, 2003.

On November 20, 2003, Dr. Donnell performed a cesarian section and hysterectomy on Mrs. Thibodeaux. While the baby was successfully delivered, Plaintiffs alleged that Dr. Donnell negligently lacerated Mrs. Thibodeaux’s bladder during the hysterectomy, which resulted in residual urologic problems and additional urologic surgery.

Plaintiffs (Kimberly Thibodeaux and her husband, Todd Thibodeaux, individually, and on behalf of their child, Gabrielle Thi-bodeaux) filed a Request for Medical Review Panel on November 4, 2004. On June 16, 2005, the Patient’s Compensation Fund (“PCF”) sent notification to the parties that an attorney chairman had been appointed. The medical review panel did not meet, nor did it issue an opinion in this matter. Neither party moved for an extension of the medical review panel.

Plaintiffs filed a medical malpractice suit in the district court on October 26, 2006. Dr. Donnell filed an exception of prescription. After a hearing, the trial court sustained the exception and dismissed the plaintiffs’ suit. A five-judge panel of the court of appeal reversed, finding that notice of the dissolution of the medical review panel was required to trigger the running of the 90-day period after which suspension of the one-year prescriptive period as a result of the request for panel would terminate. Thibodeaux v. Donnell, 2007-1845 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/12/08), 994 So.2d 612. Dr. Donnell filed a writ application in this Court, which we granted. Thibo-deaux v. Donnell, 2008-2436 (La.12/19/08), 996 So.2d 1124.

\ .LAW AND DISCUSSION

The sole issue presented for our review is whether La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3) requires that notice be sent to the parties that the medical review panel has expired, when the panel has not issued an opinion, and where the panel was not extended by court order. Because this matter involves the interpretation of a statute, it is a question of law, and is thus reviewed by this Court under a de novo standard of review. Holly & Smith Architects, Inc. v. St. Helena Congregate Facility, Inc., 2006-0582 (La.11/29/06), 943 So.2d 1037. In Holly & Smith Architects, Inc., this Court recognized:

Questions of law, such as the proper interpretation of a statute, are reviewed by this court under the de novo standard of review. After our review, we “render judgment on the record, without deference to the legal conclusions of the tribunals below. This court is the ultimate arbiter of the meaning of the laws of this state.”

Id. at 1045

The prescriptive period for medical malpractice claims is set forth in La. R.S. 9:5628(A), which provides, in pertinent part:

No action for damages for injury or death against any physician ... whether based upon tort, or breach of contract, or otherwise, arising out of patient care shall be brought unless filed within one year from the date of the alleged act, omission, or neglect, or within one year from the date of discovery of the alleged act, omission, or neglect....

La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(a)(i) further provides that “[n]o action against a health care provider covered by this Part, or his insurer, may be commenced in any court before the claimant’s proposed complaint has been presented to a medical review panel established pursuant to this Section.”

In this matter, Plaintiffs’ request for medical review panel was filed on November 4, 2004, within a year of the date of the alleged malpractice. Thus, Plaintiffs’ claims before the medical review panel were timely filed.

| ¿La. R.S. 40:1299.47(A)(2)(a) provides, in pertinent part:

The filing of the request for a review of a claim shall suspend the time within which suit must be instituted, in aecor-dance with this Part, until ninety days following notification, by certified mail, as provided in Subsection J of this Section, to the claimant or his attorney of the issuance of the opinion by the medical review panel, in the case of those health care providers covered by this Part, or in the case of a health care provider against whom a claim has been filed under the provisions of this Part, but who has not qualified under this Part, until ninety days following notification by certified mail to the claimant or his attorney by the board that the health care provider is not covered by this Part.

Furthermore, subsection (L) of this statute provides that “[w]here the medical review panel issues its opinion required by this Section, the suspension of the running of prescription shall not cease until ninety days following notification by certified mail to the claimant or his attorney of the issuance of the opinion as required by Subsection J of this Section.”

Based on the above statutory provisions, the prescriptive period was suspended by the filing of the request for the medical review panel. When La. R.S. 40:1299.47(A)(2)(a) is considered along with subsections (J) and (L) of the statute, it is clear that suspension of the running of prescription continues until ninety days following notification by certified mail to the claimant or his attorney of the issuance of the panel’s opinion. However, in this case, no opinion was ever issued by the panel. Thus, the above provisions do not address the situation before this court.

Relevant to this case is La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(b), which provides, in pertinent part:

[I]f an opinion is not rendered by the panel within twelve months after the date of notification of the selection of the attorney chairman by the executive director to the selected attorney and all other parties pursuant to Paragraph (1) of Subsection C of this Section, suit may be instituted against a health care provider covered by this Part. However, either Rparty may petition a court of competent jurisdiction for an order extending the twelve month period provided in this Subsection for good cause shown. After the twelve month period provided for in this Subsection or any court-ordered extension thereof, the medical review panel established to review the claimant’s complaint shall be dissolved without the necessity of obtaining a court order of dissolution.

At specific issue in this case is the proper interpretation of La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3), which further provides:

Ninety days after the notification to all parties by certified mail by the attorney chairman of the board of the dissolution of the medical review panel or ninety days after the expiration of any court-ordered extension as authorized by Paragraph (1) of this Subsection, the suspension of the running of prescription with respect to a qualified health care provider shall cease.

The issue presented is whether, under the facts and circumstances of this case, notice of the dissolution of the medical review panel was required to trigger the running of the ninety-day period in order to terminate the suspension of the prescriptive period.

Dr. Donnell admits that plaintiffs’ request for a medical review panel was timely asserted, but argues that, pursuant to La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(b), the medical review panel expired by operation of law, and that the expiration of a panel by failure to extend its one-year term does not require notice of that deadline to the plaintiffs or their attorney. Dr. Donnell notes that the parties in medical review panel proceedings receive notice from the PCF at the time an attorney chairman is appointed, identifying the date on which a panel will expire by operation of law, unless the panel expiration date is extended by obtaining a court order. He argues that this notice is all that is required under the statute.

Dr. Donnell further argues that the fact that no extension was obtained in this case should not make a difference, as there is no doubt that plaintiffs received the initial PCF notice of the appointment of the attorney chairman, which set in motion | fithe automatic twelve-month existence of the panel.

Thus, Dr. Donnell argues that once the panel was dissolved, the suspension of prescription, initiated by the filing of the request for the medical review panel, automatically ceased on September 14, 2006, ninety days after the dissolution of the panel by operation of law. Dr. Donnell further asserts that the remaining sixteen days of the plaintiffs’ one-year prescriptive period subsequently elapsed on September 30, 2006. Because that date fell on a Saturday, Dr. Donnell contends that the plaintiffs had until Monday, October 2, 2006, to file their suit. According to Dr. Donnell, the cause of action is prescribed because the plaintiffs did not file suit until October 26, 2006.

Plaintiffs argue that La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3) requires that notice be sent by the Attorney Chairman of the Medical Review Panel to all parties, by certified mail, of the dissolution of the medical review panel for prescription to run again. Plaintiffs argue that this statutory provision is clear, express, and purposefully provides for two explicit events, on the expiration of which the suspension of prescription ceases. The first, applicable here, provides for mandatory notification by the Attorney Chairman to all parties by certified mail that the medical review panel has dissolved, which commences the 90-day period. The second, not relevant here, is the expiration of a court-ordered extension of the medical review panel. Plaintiffs argue that Dr. Donnell’s position ignores the clear and express language of the statute.

The court of appeal agreed with the plaintiffs, finding that, based on the clear wording of the statute, because plaintiffs did not receive notice of the dissolution of the panel, the prescriptive period for instituting a suit was still suspended at the time plaintiffs filed their petition. We agree.

In David v. Our Lady of the Lake Hospital, 2002-2675 (La.7/2/03), 849 So.2d|738, 46-47, this Court stated:

Nothing is better settled than that in the construction of a law its meaning must first be sought in the language employed. If that be plain, it is the duty of the courts to enforce the law as written, provided it be within the constitutional authority of the legislative body which passed it. Thus, interpretation of any statute begins with the language of the statute itself. When the wording of any of Louisiana’s revised statutes is clear and unambiguous, the letter of it shall not be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing its spirit. If application of a clear and unambiguous statute does not lead to absurd results, the law shall be applied as written; no further interpretation may be made in search of the intent of the legislature. Words and phrases ... shall be construed according to the common and approved usage of the language. The proper connotation to be placed on a word in a statute does not depend on an isolated definition attributable to it; instead, the word and the context in which it is used shall be considered.

David, 849 So.2d at 46-7 (internal citations removed); see also: Landry v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance, 2007-1907 (La.5/21/08), 983 So.2d 66, 79.

Breaking down the language of La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3), the statute provides:

Ninety days after the notification to all parties by certified mail by the attorney chairman of the board of the dissolution of the medical review panel or
ninety days after the expiration of any court-ordered extension as authorized by Paragraph (1) of this Subsection, the suspension of the running of prescription with respect to a qualified health care provider shall cease.

(Emphasis added).

Thus, it is clear that the statute provides for two different scenarios which will result in the cessation of the suspension of the running of prescription. As this Court explained in Blackburn v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 2000-2668 (La.4/3/01), 784 So.2d 637, the disjunctive word “or” is a clear, unambiguous term whose use between two provisions makes alternative events. Blackburn, 784 So.2d Rat 642.

Thus, by the explicit language of the statute, the first scenario which will cease the suspension of the running of prescription is the passing of 90-days after “notification to all parties by certified mail by the attorney chairman of the board of the dissolution of the medical review panel.” The second scenario which will cease the suspension of the running of prescription is the passing of ninety days “after the expiration of any court-ordered extension.” Because there was no court-ordered extension of the medical review panel in this matter, the second scenario is inapplicable. Thus, the language pertaining to the first scenario is controlling.

Given the clear and explicit language of the statute, the only conclusion is that, in cases where no court-ordered extension was requested or obtained, notification to the parties is necessary for the suspension of the running of prescription to cease after the dissolution of the medical review panel. As the court of appeal noted, “[t]o conclude otherwise would render the first portion of La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3) superfluous or meaningless.” Thibodeaux, 994 So.2d at 618.

We also find that this notice requirement comports with due process concerns. Individuals are constitutionally guaranteed the right to due process of law. Procedural due process requires that before an individual is deprived of a property right, the individual must be provided with notice and an opportunity to be heard. In re Justice of the Peace Landry, 2001-0657 (La.6/29/01), 789 So.2d 1271, 1277; Hamilton v. Royal International Petroleum, 2005-846 (La.2/22/06), 934 ,So.2d 25, 30.

CONCLUSION

This case presents the question of what event triggers the running of the ninety-day period after which suspension of prescription ceases when a medical review panel [¡¡is dissolved by operation of law. La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(1)(b) speaks merely to the dissolution of the review panel. Because the running of the ninety-day period is triggered not upon dissolution, but upon notification, the provisions of La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(b) are inapplicable. Rather, the clear, unambiguous, and explicit language of La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3) is controlling in this case, and in accordance with its plain language, suspension of prescription ceases ninety days after the notification of the dissolution of the medical review panel. In this matter, there is nothing in the record to support a finding that such notice was sent to the pax-ties. In the absence of notification, px-escription was still interrupted at the time Plaintiffs filed suit in the distinct court. Thus, Plaintiffs claims were timely filed.

DECREE

For the above reasons, we affix-m the decision of the court of appeal, finding that Plaintiffs’ medical malpractice suit was timely filed.

VICTORY and GUIDRY, JJ., dissent and assign reasons.

TRAYLOR, J., dissents for reasons assigned by VICTORY and GUIDRY, JJ.

VICTORY, J.,

dissenting.

U dissent from the majority opinion holding that notice of a medical review panel’s dissolution is necessary to trigger the running of the 90-day period in La. R.S. 40:1299.47. While there is some support for this holding, the statutes i-egard-ing this issue conflict and the majority’s opinion leads to absurd consequences. La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(b) px-ovides that if an medical review panel opinion is not i*en-dered within 12 months of the date of notification of the selection of the attorney chairman, suit may be instituted against the health care provider. That statute also provides that either pai-ty may ask for an extension of the 12 month period for good cause shown. La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(b). After the 12 month period or any court ordered extension, the medical review panel shall be dissolved without the necessity of obtaining a court order and suit may then be filed against the health care provider. La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(b). That statute does not require notice to the parties that the panel has been dissolved and allows for suit to be filed upon the automatic dissolution of the panel. On the other hand, La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3) provides:

Ninety days after the notification to all parties by certified mail by the attorney chairman of the board of the dissolution of the medical review panel or ninety days after the expiration of any court-ordered extension as authorized by Paragraph (1) of this Subsection, the suspension of the running of prescription with respect to a qualified health care provider shall cease.

| .¿This statute appears to provide that the suspension of prescription ceases ninety days after (1) notification to all parties by certified mail of the dissolution of the panel; or (2) the expiration of any court ordered extension. The problem I see -with this statute is that no provision of the Medical Malpractice Act requires that the parties be notified of the dissolution of the panel, and, it makes no sense that a party could file suit after expiration of the 12 month period with no notification, but that prescription is still suspended during that time because of the lack of notification. Also, the attorney chairman’s duties end with the dissolution of the panel and it is highly unlikely that the panel would ever notify the parties of its dissolution, given that they had not been working to render an opinion within the 12 month period. In addition, La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(l)(b) provides that the suspensive period ceases by operation of law. Further, under the majority’s holding, if the parties are never notified, prescription will be forever suspended, and that cannot have been the intent of the legislature. Also, there is no logical reason why notification would be required where the panel is dissolved after the ordinary 12 month period, but not when the parties got an extension of the 12 month period. Finally, can a plaintiff whose lawsuit has been dismissed for failure to file suit within 90 days of the dissolution of the panel now go back and have that judgment of dismissal nullified if he or she never received actual notice of the panel’s dissolution from the attorney chairman?

In my view, given that the language of La. R.S. 40:1299.47(B)(3) is inconsistent with the other provisions of the MMA which do not require notice of the panel’s dissolution in order for a plaintiff to file suit against the health care provider, and given that the majority’s interpretation of that statute to require notice would lead to the absurd result of having prescription suspended forever, I disagree with the majority opinion and respectfully dissent.

GUIDRY, Justice, dissents and assigns reasons.

|J respectfully dissent from the majority opinion for the reasons expressed in Justice Victory’s dissent. I write separately to suggest that, given the conflicting provisions in La.Rev.Stat. 40:1299.47 regarding whether notice of the dissolution of a medical review panel is necessary to commence the running of the ninety-day suspensive period, and given a majority holding that could lead to absurd consequences, the legislature should consider revisiting this provision in the Medical Malpractice Act to provide consistency on the notice requirement.

        . Placenta previa is implantation of the placenta over the internal opening of the cervix. Total placenta previa occurs when the placenta completely covers the opening. The Merck Manual 2196 (18th ed.2006).

      . Judge Kuhn dissented.

      . Subsection (J) of the statute requires the chairman to submit a copy of the panel's report to the board and all parties and attorneys by registered or certified mail within five days after the panel renders its opinion.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: PER CURIAM.

license: Public Domain

text:
    In re Jonathan C. PEDERSEN.
    No. 2008-OB-2443.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   ON APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR

PER CURIAM.

LThe Committee on Bar Admissions (“Committee”) opposed the application of petitioner, Jonathan C. Pedersen, to sit for the Louisiana Bar Examination based on character and fitness concerns relating to three alcohol-related criminal charges. We subsequently granted petitioner permission to sit for the bar exam, with the provision that upon his successful completion of the exam, he apply to the court for the appointment of a commissioner to take character and fitness evidence. In re: Pedersen, 08-1566 (La.7/14/08), 986 So.2d 66.

Petitioner thereafter successfully passed the essay portion of the bar exam, and upon his application, we remanded this matter to the Committee on Bar Admissions Panel on Character and Fitness to conduct an investigation and appointed a commissioner to take character and fitness evidence. Following the proceedings, the commissioner filed his report with this court, recommending that petitioner be conditionally admitted to the practice of law, subject to a five-year period of probation and the execution of a new contract with the Lawyers Assistance Program. Neither petitioner nor the Committee objected to that recommendation.

Considering the commissioner’s recommendation and the entire record of this proceeding, we conclude petitioner is eligible to be admitted to the practice of law in Louisiana on a conditional basis for a period of five years, subject to the requirement that he execute a new contract with the Lawyers Assistance Program and comply with |2all of the terms and conditions thereof. The probationary period may be extended upon recommendation of the Executive Director of the Lawyers Assistance Program. Should petitioner fail to make a good faith effort to satisfy these conditions, or should he commit any misconduct during the period of probation, his conditional right to practice may be terminated or he may be subjected to other discipline pursuant to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement.

CONDITIONAL ADMISSION GRANTED.

JOHNSON and VICTORY, JJ., would deny admission.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Derrick S. JONES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2009-KH-1052.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 18, 2009.
   In re Jones, Derrick S.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. I, Nos. 04-F2810-3, 04-F2811-3.

Relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on a motion for speedy trial filed on or about April 28, 2006. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the motion. The district court is ordered to provide this Court with a copy of its judgment.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Norris VESSELL.
    No. 2009-KD-1085.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 18, 2009.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 452-749.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.

GUIDRY, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Norris VESSELL.
    No. 2009-KK-1105.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 19, 2009.
   In re Vessell, Norris; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 452,749; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-0640.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Kenneth JOHNSON.
    No. 2009-KK-1072.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 20, 2009.
    Reconsideration Denied June 3, 2009.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. C, No. 475-990; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-0603.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

KNOLL, J., would grant.

GUIDRY, J., would grant.


text:
    Randy FONTENOT, et al. v. PATTERSON INSURANCE, et al. Germaine Brooks, et al. v. City of Lafayette, et al.
    No. 2009-C-0669.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
    Prior report: La.App., 5 So.3d 954.
   In re Louisiana State of et al.; Transportation and Development Dept, of; — Defendants); Applying For Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial Distinct Court Div. G, Nos. 2001-2002, 2001-2216; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1624.

Granted.


text:
    Charles TONEY v. LINCOLN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, State Farm Insurance Company, A Step Forward, Inc., and Angela S. Wolf.
    No. 2009-CC-0702.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Lincoln General Ins. Co. et al.; — : Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 564,936; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CW 2335.

Granted. The judgment of court of appeal is reversed and the judgment of the trial court granting partial summary judgment in favor of Lincoln General, Ins. Co. is hereby reinstated.

KIMBALL, C.J., would deny.

WEIMER, J., would deny.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Raymond MITCHELL, Jerome Mitchell and Wayne Alexis.
    No. 2009-KK-0977.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. C, No. 482-866; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-0577.

Writ granted. The trial court judgment granting the suppression of testimony concerning the contents of the surveillance videotape is hereby reversed. The evidence establishes that the pertinent video footage was lost, and this loss was not due to bad faith on the part of the State of Louisiana. La.C.E. art. 1004(1).

JOHNSON, J., would deny.


text:
    In re Appeal of DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 08-PDB-067.
    No. 2009-OB-0219.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Stephens Jr., Earl J.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Appeal of Decision of the Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 08-PDB-067.

Leave to appeal denied.


text:
    In re Appeal of DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 08-PDB-073.
    No. 2009-OB-0220.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Thomas, Elijah; — Plaintiff; Applying For Appeal of Decision of the Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 08-PDB-073.

Leave to appeal denied.


text:
    In re Appeal of DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 08-PDB-083.
    No. 2009-OB-0409.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Zacharie, John G.; — Other; Applying For Appeal of Decision of Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 08-PDB-083.

Leave to appeal denied.


text:
    In re Appeal of DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 08-PDB-084.
    No. 2009-OB-0445.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Atkins, David; — Plaintiff; Applying For Appeal of Decision of the Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 08-PDB-084.

Leave to appeal denied.


text:
    In re Appeal of DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 08-PDB-087.
    No. 2009-OB-0514.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Lard, Morris C.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Appeal of Decision of the Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 08-PDB-087.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.


text:
    Doris SYKES, et al. v. Robert C. LOWTHER, Jr., et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0429.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Lowther Jr., Robert C, Farmer and Burns, Ltd., a Professional Law Corp. And Continental Casualty Company; Defendants; Applying for Rehearing of this Court’s order dated April 17, 2009; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. I, No. 2006-25; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-C-0852.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.

WEIMER, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Derrick Nicholas JOHNSON.
    No. 2008-K-2656.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Johnson, Derrick Nicholas; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 483,407; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KA 0500.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    Adele GRADNIGO, et ux. v. LOUISIANA FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INS. CO., et al.
    No. 2009-C-0768.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Gradnigo, Adele et ux.; Gradnigo, Gerald; — Plaintiffs); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 2005-0340 C; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-1198.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    Clara EVANS v. Hampton INN.
    No. 2009-C-0769.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Hampton Inn; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation, District 02, No. 06-03795; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-1195.

Not considered. Not timely filed. See Sup.Ct. Rule X, Section 5(d).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Corey W. and Nicholas OLIPHANT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1324.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Oliphant, Corey W.; Oliphant, Nicholas; — Plaintiffs); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Natchitoches, 10th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. C9650; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 07-1210.

Denied.

KIMBALL, C.J., would grant.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

WEIMER, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gordon NEWMAN.
    No. 2008-KP-1621.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Newman, Gordon a/k/a; Newman, Gordon Jr.; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. A, No. 380-770; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0349.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gordon NEWMAN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1646.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Newman, Gordon; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. A, No. 380-770; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0349.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Ernest Ray WILSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1950.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Wilson, Ernest Ray Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 225,045; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43618-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Wilbert Gene GREEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2124.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Green, Wilbert Gene; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedíal Writs, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 259,659; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 08-00695.

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. Lester JONES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2123.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Jones, Lester; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 356-872; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0829.

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 WASHINGTON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2122.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Washington, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 94-CR-857525; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0835.

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. Gregory GUIDRY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2101.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Guidry, Gregory; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. C, No. 421-849; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Nos. 2008-K-0593, 2008-K-0828.

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. Morris PRICE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2077.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Price, Morris; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 95-1971; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KH-571.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. William A. MUSE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2076.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Muse, William A.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 06-F-0412; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Nos. 43509-KH, 43803-KH.

Denied.


text:
    Preston G. DEMOUCHET, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2075.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Demouchet, Preston G., Jr.;— Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. D, Nos. 89,969, 124,139, 95-141810.

Denied. See State ex rel. Fleury v. State, 93-2898 (La.10/13/95), 661 So.2d 488.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Milton J. GREEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1996.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Green, Milton J.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 68167; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0654.

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

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Adam FRANK v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1995.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Frank, Adam; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Landry, 27th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 03-K-0233; to the Court of Appeal, Thud Circuit, No. KH 08-00475.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Majuangy D. EVANS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1993.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Evans, Majuangy D.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 01-1569; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KH-564.

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. Jamal ROBINSON.
    No. 2008-K-2565.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Robinson, Jamal; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 449-803; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-KA-0287.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Chris JEFFERSON.
    No. 2008-K-2523.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Jefferson, Chris; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 459-778; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-KA-0470.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. James Earl FRANKLIN.
    No. 2008-K-2371.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Franklin, James Earl; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lincoln, 3rd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 54,574; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43,173-KA.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Saderrick WYATT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2151.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Wyatt, Saderrick; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Desoto, 11th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 512,685; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43791-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Carl MARSHALL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2150.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Marshall, Carl; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 9945-92; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 08-00638.

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. Benjamin CLARK v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2149.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Clark, Benjamin; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 02-5545; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, Nos. 08-KH-503, 08-KH-542.

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. Jeffrey A. SAVAGE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2148.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Savage, Jeffrey A.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 49,531; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43836-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. Troy SHELVIN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2146.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Shelvin, Troy; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 88-CR-56962; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 08-00660.

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. Edward HILLIARD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2137.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Hilliard, Edward; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. V, No. 12-98-409; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 1178.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Arthur RHODES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2126.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Rhodes, Arthur; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 357-278; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Nos. 2007-K-1265, 2008-K-0021.

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 of Louisiana v. Timothy Walter LOFTON.
    No. 2008-KO-2661.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Lofton, Timothy Walter; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 424,775; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KA 0747.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Joe MITCHELL, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KO-2659.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Mitchell, Joe Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 898869; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KA 0372.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Warren RANGE.
    No. 2008-KO-2648.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Range, Warren; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. L, Nos. 12-80-1044, 11-81-975; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KA 0301.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Eugene A. Bowie JACKSON.
    No. 2008-KO-2639.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Jackson, Eugene A. Bowie; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Franklin, 5th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 2006318F; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43,374-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Craig BRADLEY and Lonnie Smith.
    No. 2008-K-2611.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Bradley, Craig; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 448-975; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-KA-0195.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Mikala L. JANUARY.
    No. 2008-K-2599.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re January, Mikala L.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Beauregard, 36th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. CR 20-07; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-281.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Damone WALKER.
    No. 2008-K-2595.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Walker, Damone; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 06-6079; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KA-277.

Denied.

GUIDRY, J, recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Keith LABAT.
    No. 2008-OK-2575.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. 0, Nos. 409471, 414088, 409521, 405900, 4222242, 403991, 401014, 415703, 405899, 420313, 423376.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Keith LABAT.
    No. 2008-OK-2574.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In Re Labat, Keith; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. 0, Nos. 405899, 405900, 409521, 415703, 420313, 422242, 423376, 414088.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Joel SMITH.
    No. 2008-K-2566.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Smith, Joel; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 11-04-0557; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007/KA/0167.

Denied.


text:
    Robert TURNER, Sr. v. RELIANCE INSURANCE CO., et al.
    No. 2009-C-0756.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Safeway Insurance Co. of LA;— Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of Allen, 33th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. C-2000-679 “A”; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-1135.

Denied.


text:
    James E. MCCRORY v. CAN DO, INC., et al.
    No. 2009-C-0754.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re McCrory, James E.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Cameron, 38th Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. 10-16413; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-506.

Denied.


text:
    Glenn M. HEBERT v. LOUISIANA LICENSED PROFESSIONAL VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION COUNSELORS and Sy Arceneaux.
    No. 2009-C-0750.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Arceneaux, Sy; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 2006-4643; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 07-610.

Denied.


author: KIMBALL, C.J.,

text:
    Glenn M. HEBERT v. LOUISIANA LICENSED PROFESSIONAL VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION COUNSELORS and Sy Arceneaux.
    No. 2009-C-0753.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Louisiana Licensed Professional Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors Board of Examiners; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 2006-4643; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 07-610.

Denied.

KIMBALL, C.J.,

concurring in the denial of the writ. I concur in the denial of this writ. While this case presents compelling legal issues, the errors contained within the procedural history of this matter preclude us from entertaining the issues presented.


text:
    Steven THIBODEAUX, et al. v. LIVING WATERS COMMUNITY CHURCH, et al.
    No. 2009-C-0749.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Guideone Mutual Ins. Co.; Living Waters Community Church et al.; — Defendants); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 2005-3871; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-1064.

Denied.


text:
    Patricia BOURQUE v. ESSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0744.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Donald Lack Construction Inc. et al.; Essex Insurance Co.; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 2003-4398; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 08-01536.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.

GUIDRY, J., would grant.


text:
    James CARINDER; Paul and Gwen Gasser; Ronald and Judith Laiche; Vincent J. Liuzza, III; Andy and Isabel Messina; Michael and Cathy Pulaski; and Ruth Tufts v. BASF CORPORATION, Master Wall, Inc.; McMath Construction, Inc., Covington Land, LLC; Ja-Roy Exterminating Services of St. Tammany, Inc.; Mariner’s Island Condominium Association; Glen Dupuy; Colony Insurance Company; Gemini Services, Inc.; Piazza & Associates, Inc.; American Casualty Company of Reading, Pa.; and Zurich North America.
    No. 2009-CC-0739.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re McMath Construction Inc.; Carin-der, James et al.; Gasser, Gwen; Gasser, Paul; Laiche, Judith; Laiche, Ronald; Liuzza III, Vincent J.; Messina, Andy; Messina, Isabel; Pulaski, Cathy; Pulaski, Michael; Tufts, Ruth; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 2007-11478; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CW 2219.

Denied.


text:
    Charles TONEY v. LINCOLN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, State Farm Insurance Company, A Step Forward, Inc., and Angela S. Wolf.
    No. 2009-CC-0738.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Toney, Charles; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 564,936; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CW 2335.

Denied.


text:
    Jonah BERNSTEIN v. POWERHOUSE GYM OF METAIRIE, INC. d/b/a Anconas Gym, Joey Anconas, Jr., East-West Health and Wellness Center, Inc., The Liu Institute, Shawn Liu and Patrick Berry.
    No. 2009-C-0727.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Liu Institute; Liu, Shawn; — Defendants); Applying For Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 626-932; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-CA-790.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    CHROMACEUTICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. LUNDY & DAVIS, L.L.P.
    No. 2009-C-0428.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Chromaceutical Advanced Technologies, Inc.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 2007-3946; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CA 08-653.

Denied.

KIMBALL, C.J., would grant.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    Mamta Pani RAO v. Maheswar RAO.
    No. 2009-CJ-0950.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Rao, Mamta Pañi; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, East Baton Rouge Family Court, No. 141,912; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CU 2399.

Denied.


text:
    ADVANCED POLYMER COATINGS, L.L.C. v. COOPERHEAT-MQS, INC., et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0791.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Advanced Polymer Coatings L.L.C.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 74,738; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CW 2234.

Denied.


text:
    Linda LUGO v. PARK MANAGEMENT d/b/a Sun Suites and Crestwood and James River Insurance Company.
    No. 2009-CC-0780.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re James River Ins. Co.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. P, No. 609-840; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 09-C-6.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Mara Jade TENHUNDFELD.
    No. 2009-KK-0778.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Tenhundfeld, Mara Jade; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 05-1283; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 09-K-54.

Denied.


text:
    Pamela MERRIETT v. BUDGET BUILD LUMBER & SUPPLY, INC.
    No. 2009-C-0776.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Merriett, Pamela; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation District le, No. 07-02508; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-1090.

Denied.


text:
    Nuzzly SAGASTUME v. DAUGHTERS OF CHARITY NATIONAL HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., et al.
    No. 2009-C-0775.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Sagastume, Nuzzly; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. N, No. 06-3886; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-C-0459.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    Jeffrey B. SMITH, et al. v. CITY OF RUSTON, et al.
    No. 2009-C-0773.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Hollingsworth, Dan Mayor; Ru-ston, City of; — Defendant(s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lincoln, 3rd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 47,031; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 44,018-CA.

Denied.


text:
    Jeremy and Kristy MORAS, et al. v. ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0772.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Arch Insurance Company et al.; Dauzat, Larry; Gilchrist Construction Co.; Ponthier, Jeffery P.; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 2008-2230-A; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 09-00046.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Leon MORVANT.
    No. 2009-KK-0771.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Morvant, Leon; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Vermilion, 15th Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. 2008-CR-49948; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 09-00258.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant.

GUIDRY, J., would grant.


text:
    Patrick E. PHILLIPS, Jr., et al. v. G & H SEED COMPANY, INC., et al.
    No. 2009-C-0759.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Judice, Brenda; Judice, Larry;— PIaintiff(s); Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of St. Landry, 27th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 00-2220-D; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-924.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., recused.


text:
    CHICAGO PROPERTY INTERESTS, L.L.C. and Zoe Aldige, Individually and on Behalf of Those Similarly Situated v. Aaron BROUSSARD and Jefferson Parish.
    No. 2009-CC-0758.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 22, 2009.
   In re Consolidated Drainage District No. 2; Jefferson Parish; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. I, Nos. 624-459, 624-778, 625-145, 626-415, 635-370, 635-539, 635-883, 625-998; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-C-1210.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Lance SYLVESTER.
    No. 2009-KK-1049.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 27, 2009.
   In re Sylvester, Lance; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. 4, No. 501-597; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-0612.

Writ granted. The commissioner lacked sufficient information to find probable cause regarding the charge of possession of a stolen automobile; however, there was probable cause for a finding of illegal possession of stolen things. The court is ordered to reconsider defendant’s bond accordingly. The case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this finding.


text:
    Mary DEW, et al. v. EHO2002, L.L.C., et al.
    No. 2009-CC-1150.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 27, 2009.
   In re Easthaven Care and Rehabilitation Center; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. D, No. 2007-15257; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-C-0659.

Granted. It is well settled that the right of a litigant to a jury trial is fundamental in character and the courts will indulge every presumption against a waiver, loss, or forfeiture thereof. Berrigan v. Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, 04-0189 (La.3/26/04), 871 So.2d 332. Considering the totality of the circumstances in this case, we find relator properly preserved its right to a jury trial. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court striking the jury is reversed and the jury trial reinstated.

KNOLL, J., would deny.


text:
    In re Scott Michael GUIDRY.
    No. 2009-OB-1128.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 27, 2009.
   In re Guidry, Scott Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying For Permission to Take the July Louisiana State Bar Exam.

Granted. Petitioner is allowed to take the Louisiana State Bar Examination. Upon satisfactorily passing the examination, petitioner may apply to this Court for the appointment of a commissioner in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XVII, section 9, to take evidence and report to this Court as to whether petitioner has the appropriate character and fitness to be admitted to the bar and allowed to practice law in the State of Louisiana.


text:
    Peterson M. YOKUM, et al. v. 615 BOURBON STREET, L.L.C., et al.
    No. 2009-CC-1032.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 27, 2009.
   In re Anderson, Polly Elizabeth; Yo-kum, Peterson M. et al.; — Plaintiff(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2005-9748; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-C-0262.

Denied.


text:
    Warren LESTER, et al. v. EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, et al.
    No. 2009-CC-1057.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 27, 2009.
   In re Exxon Mobil Corp. et al.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 630-402; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 09-C-87.

Denied.


text:
    WOODLANDS DEVELOPMENT, LLC d/b/a Woodlands Apartment Complex v. CRC INSURANCE SERVICE, INC. and Certain Underwriters of Lloyds of London, St. Paul Insurance Company, Hartwig Insurance Agency, Ltd. and Hartwig Moss IV.
    No. 2009-CC-1161.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 28, 2009.
   In re Certain Underwriters of Lloyds of London; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 2006-9689; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-C-0688.

Stay denied. Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ricky BUSBY.
    No. 2009-KK-1162.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 28, 2009.
   In re Busby, Ricky; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 483^197; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-0473.

Stay denied. Writ denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. James TAYLOR v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2009-KH-1134.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Taylor, James; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 431,577; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-377.

The application is transferred to the district court with instructions to the district judge to act on relator’s application for post-conviction relief filed via certified mail on June 20, 2005 and November 28, 2007. The district court is ordered to provide this court with a copy of its judgment. A copy of the application is attached.


text:
    In re Philip R. PILIE.
    No. 2009-OB-0866.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Pilie, Philip R.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Petition for Admission to the Louisiana Bar.

Admission denied.


text:
    In re APPEAL OF DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 08-PDB-090.
    No. 2009-OB-0654.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Williams, Patrick W.; — Other; Applying For Appeal of Decision of the Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 08-PDB-090.

Leave To Appeal Denied.


text:
    In re APPEAL OF DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 08-PDB-078.
    No. 2009-OB-0715.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Breiting, JoAnn; — Plaintiff; Applying For Appeal of Decision of the Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 08-PDB-078.

Leave To Appeal Denied.


text:
    Michael F. ADINOLFI, M.D., et al. v. TENET LOUISIANA, INC., et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0855.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Adinolfi M.D. Michael F. et al.;— Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 2006-05689; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-C-0091.

Writ denied. Stay denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Victor VERDUN, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1450.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Verdun, Victor; Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s order dated April 3, 2009; Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 313477; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008-KW-0278.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. John W. TONUBBEE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1597.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Tonubbee, John W.; -Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated April 13, 2009; Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Court, Div. E, Nos. 80-143, 80-151.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. James GREEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-1964.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Green, James; — Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated August 29, 2008; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 470-137.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Raymond DARNELL.
    No. 2008-K-2258.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Darnell, Raymond; — Defendant; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated May 1, 2009; Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court, Div. C, No. 251,486; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43,048-KA.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    Renee CHRISTENSON and David Christenson v. Lee MADERE, Jerrelyn Jessop Madere and Les Carillons Condominium Association, Inc.
    No. 2009-CC-612.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Christenson, David; Christenson, Renee et al.; — -Plaintiffs; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated May 1, 2009; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2007-9243; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-C-1356.

Denied.


text:
    Renee CHRISTENSON and David Christenson v. Lee MADERE, Jerrelyn Jessop Madere and Les Carillons Condominium Association, Inc.
    No. 2009-CC-0613.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Christenson, David; Christenson, Renee et al.; Plaintiff(s); Applying for Reconsideration of this Courts action dated May 1, 2009; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2007-9243; to the court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-C-1357.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. David COSSICH.
    No. 2008-KP-1630.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Cossich, David; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 435457; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0723.

Denied.

KIMBALL, C.J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Paulette JONES.
    No. 2008-KP-1668.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Jones, Paulette; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. O, No. 97-420; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KH-448.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael BAILEY.
    No. 2008-KP-1912.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Bailey, Michael; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Bernard, 34th Judicial District Court Div. E, Nos. 315-053, 315-054; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0527.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Melvin ELIE.
    No. 2008-KP-2037.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Elie, Melvin; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 1-03-0543; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0981.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael MONROE.
    No. 2008-KP-2078.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Monroe, Michael; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. K, No. 389-642; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0630.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Marshall Coleman BUCKLEY.
    No. 2008-KP-2080.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Buckley, Marshall Coleman; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 410649; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0800.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Charles S. PURSELL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2125.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Pursell, Charles S.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 345593; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 KW 2488.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Terry LATHERS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2127.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Lathers, Terry; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Pointe Coupee, 18th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 65366; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Nos. 2008 KW 0754, 2007 KW 2567.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Danny JACKSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2128.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Jackson, Danny; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 04-5401; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KH-516.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. James E. WHITE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2129.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re White, James E.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 04-CR5-90267; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0783.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Eddie DEJEAN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2130.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Dejean, Eddie; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Plaquemines, 25th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 06-327; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0812.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Joseph J. ROUSSELL.
    No. 2008-KP-2135.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Roussell, Joseph J.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 416-724; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0851.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Henry DAVIS, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2143.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Davis, Henry, Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of W. Baton Rouge, 18th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 990-116; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0727.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Sylvester TRACKLING v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2145.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Trackling, Sylvester; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 431-778; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0159.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Shawn HOUSELY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2147.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Housely, Shawn; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. John, 40th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 03-260; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KH-497.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Lawrence YOUNGBLOOD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2152.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Youngblood, Lawrence; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 444-594; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-KH-0815.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gerald MCKNIGHT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2178.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re McKnight, Gerald; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 05-773; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KH-408.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Ronald EDISON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2181.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Edison,'Ronald; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. D, Nos. 99-151, 754, 04-165, 915; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008-KW-759.

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; cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Nick SCOTT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2196.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Scott, Nick; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 364-407; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-K-0911.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.3d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Paul MCQUAIG v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2198.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re McQuaig, Paul; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 05-CR7-093802; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008-KW-0809.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Calvin LEWIS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2202.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Lewis, Calvin; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 43995-B.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Leon J. HORNE V. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2203.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Horne, Leon J.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 283104; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KW 0808.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Preston DEMOUCHET, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2008-KH-2242.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Demouchet, Preston Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 31,681; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH08-1123.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Christopher JEFFERSON.
    No. 2008-KO-2663.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Jefferson, Christopher; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 459-778; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-KA-0470.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Terrence FLEMING.
    No. 2008-KO-2691.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Fleming, Terrence;. — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 12-05-0389; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 KA 0501.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ronald ADAMS.
    No. 2008-KO-2692.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Adams, Ronald; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 463-014; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-KA-0324.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Deontray MINGO.
    No. 2008-KO-2702.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Mingo, Deontray; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Red River, 39th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 103,546; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43,-523-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Justin Latron GLOVER.
    No. 2008-KO-2756.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Glover, Justin L.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 250,384; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43,-584-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. William JOHNSON.
    No. 2008-K-2787.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Johnson, William; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 07-2588; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-KA-268.

Denied.

GUIDRY, J., recused.


text:
    Bobby J. CLARK v. GODFREY KNIGHT FARMS, INC.
    No. 2009-C-0562.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Godfrey Knight Farms Inc.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Comp. Dist. 9, No. 06-07610; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CA 1723.

Denied.


text:
    Michael & Tobie MORVAN, et al. v. James R. MOORE & State Farm Insurance Companies.
    No. 2009-C-0666.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Morvan, Michael et al.; Morvan, Tobie; — Plaintiff(s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 495,446; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 43,904-CA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Sedrick Michael BRUMFIELD.
    No. 2009-KK-0677.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Brumfield, Sedrick Michael; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 08-07-0728; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2009 KW 0036.

Denied.


text:
    ENVIRONMENTAL INDUSTRIES RECYCLING, INC. v. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.
    No. 2009-CC-0694.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Bickham III, Thomas C.; Environmental Quality, Louisiana Dept, of; — Defendants); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of W. Baton Rouge, 18th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 33356; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CW 2061.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    Joseph H. FONTENOT, Jr. v. WAL-MART.
    No. 2009-C-0770.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation Dist. 4, No. 04-07245; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 08-158.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.

GUIDRY, J., would grant.


text:
    Curklin ATKINS v. MARTIN INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation c/o Audubon Insurance Company, et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0807.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Martin Insurance Agency Inc. et al.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Wilts, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. K, No. 2005-12645; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-C-0173.

Denied.


text:
    Ruby LANE v. PATIENT’S COMPENSATION FUND OVERSIGHT BOARD.
    No. 2009-C-0810.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Patient’s Compensation Fund Oversight Board; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 546,218; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CA 0150.

Denied.


text:
    Madeline D. EDWARDS, Individually, and on Behalf of Her Minor Child, Derrick Edwards v. DOUG RUEDLINGER, INC., Louisiana High School Athletic Association, and the Orleans Parish School Board.
    No. 2009-C-0811.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Orleans Parish School Board;— Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. I, No. 90-3878; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-CA-0772.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.

WEIMER, J., would grant.


text:
    Kent W. HALL, Sr. v. Tina Williams HALL.
    No. 2009-C-0812.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Hall Sr., Kent W.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Coui't Div. D, No. 62,994; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-CA-706.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.

WEIMER, J., would grant.


text:
    Guy AUGUSTINE v. SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION, et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0815.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Schindler Elevator Corporation;— Defendant; Applying -For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. D, No. 2004-16186; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-C-1575.

Denied.


text:
    SUCCESSION OF Mrs. Viola Mary Tabor BADEAUX.
    No. 2009-C-0822.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Fernandez, C. Raymond; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 18714; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CA 1085.

Denied.


text:
    Javon MOSES v. TERREBONNE GENERAL MEDICAL CENTER.
    No. 2009-C-0824.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Moses, Javon; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation District 9, No. 06-06695; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CA 1919.

Denied.


text:
    MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. v. Feltus A. DAIGLE and Rebecca Cunningham Daigle.
    No. 2009-C-0826.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Daigle, Rebecaa Cunningham;— Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 610-153; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-CA-1203.

Denied.


text:
    Ammon L. MILLER, Jr. v. Desiree CHARBONNET, et al.
    No. 2009-C-0827.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Miller Jr., Ammon L.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2007-1064; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-CA-1195.

Denied.


text:
    PRIVATE CONNECTION PROPERTY, INC., et al. v. FOX CARS, LLC, et al.
    No. 2009-C-0828.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Alden, W. William Dr.; Private Connection Property Inc. et al.; — Plaintiffs); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 07-5983; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2008-CA-1129.

Denied.


text:
    Christopher Charles BALDWIN and Charles Albert Baldwin III et ux. v. NEW ORLEANS & GULF COAST RAILWAY COMPANY and Tracy Ulm.
    No. 2009-CC-0829.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re New Orleans & Gulf Coast Railway Company; Ulm, Tracy;- — Defendants); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 657-189; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 09-C-50.

Denied.


text:
    Todd BEAUCOUDRAY, David Beaucoudray and Kim Beaucoudray v. Dr. John WALSH, Dr. James T. Bennett and Columbia/HCA, d/b/a Tulane University Hospital and Clinic and Tulane Hospital for Children, Tulane University Hospital and Clinic and Tulane Hospital for Children, et al.
    No. 2009-C-0832.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Beaucoudray, David; Beaucoud-ray, Kim; Beaucoudray, Todd et al.;— Plaintiffs); Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. A, No. 2002-13930; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-CA-0818.

Denied.


text:
    ASSOCIATED GROCERS, INC. v. ROUSES’S ENTERPRISES, L.L.C.
    No. 2009-CC-0833.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Associated Grocers, Inc.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, N.o. 568,598; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2008 CW 2555.

Denied.


text:
    Walter LILLY, et al. v. ORLEANS PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, et al.
    No. 2009-CC-0859.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Allstate Insurance Company; Mann, Lawrence; Mann, Stephanie; State Farm and Casualty Company; Stewart, Gaynelle; Stewart, Gustave Jr.; — Third Party(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. C, No. 1995-2819; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-C0342.

Denied.


text:
    RESCOMM HOLDINGS NO. 2, LLC v. Leon J. GIBERT, Jr.
    No. 2009-CC-0861.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Thomas Lawrence; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. L, Nos. 02-8302-L, 06-86-F; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-C-0144.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Richard THOMPSON.
    No. 2009-KK-0862.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Thompson, Richard; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 470-612; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-0117.

Denied.


text:
    BELLCO ELECTRIC, INC. v. Ellen O. MILLER.
    No. 2009-OC-0863.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Miller, Ellen O.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 652-059; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 08-CA-785.

Denied.

GUIDRY, J., recused.


text:
    HIXSON AUTOPLEX OF ALEXANDRIA, INC. v. Donald Ray LEWIS.
    No. 2009-C-0955.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Lewis, Donald Ray; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 231,139; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. OS-1142.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

KNOLL, J., would grant.

GUIDRY, J., would grant.


text:
    Jeremy Wayne CLEMENTS v. Brandy Dawn Lenard CLEMENTS.
    No. 2009-CC-0995.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 29, 2009.
   In re Clements, Brandy Dawn Lenard; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 232,987; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Nos. CW 09-00254, CW 09-00254.

Denied.