author: PER CURIAM. WEIMER, J.,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Terrence TURNER.
    No. 2013-KK-0180.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   PER CURIAM.

hWe granted the State’s writ application in this criminal matter to review whether the Trial Court abused its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion to suppress. After reviewing the transcript from the suppression hearing, we conclude the Trial Court abused its discretion. For the following reasons, we reverse and vacate the ruling of the lower courts and hereby deny the defendant’s motion to suppress.

In this case, the Trial Court granted the defendant’s motion to suppress, reasoning the force and duration of an investigatory Terry stop transformed the stop into a de facto arrest for which the officer did not have probable cause. First, we note that the Trial Court’s de facto arrest analysis begins with a faulty premise, stating the circumstances of the defendant’s detention “would easily leave a reasonable person to believe that they were not free to leave and was therefore not within the scope of Terry.” A suspect’s inability to leave merely establishes whether a “seizure” has occurred, not whether a seizure was of the Terry stop or arrest variety. 4 Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure § 9.2(g) (5th ed.2013). Rather, the determination of whether a detention exceeds the bounds of a Terry stop is a fact-intensive inquiry. State v. Miller, 00-1657, pp. 2-8 (La.10/26/01), 798 So.2d 947, 949 (per curiam). In this case, there is no doubt the officer seized |2the defendant. However, the facts the Trial Court found pertinent — that defendant was detained in a private office for an hour while awaiting the arrival of a K-9 unit and was eventually handcuffed — do not support its conclusion that the officer’s lawful investigatory stop escalated into an a de facto arrest unsupported by probable cause.

The officer, relying on his training and experience, reasonably suspected the defendant was a drug courier. The officer was thus objectively justified in pursuing a means of investigation that would quickly confirm or dispel his suspicions. La.Code Crim. Proc. art. 215.1(A); Miller, 00-1657 at p. 3, 798 So.2d at 949. Here, the officer detained the defendant in a private office at the train station for approximately one hour while awaiting the arrival of a K-9 unit to sniff the defendant’s luggage. In assessing the effect of an investigatory detention’s duration, the United States Supreme Court and this Court have focused on the diligence of the detaining officer(s):

In assessing whether a detention is too long in duration to be justified as an investigative stop, we consider it appropriate to examine whether the police diligently pursued a means of investigation that was likely to confirm or dispel their suspicions quickly, during which time it was necessary to detain the defendant. A court making this assessment should take care to consider whether the police are acting in a swiftly developing situation, and in such cases the court should not indulge in unrealistic second guessing.

U.S. v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 686, 105 S.Ct. 1568, 84 L.Ed.2d 605 (1985); Miller, 00-1657 at p. 3, 798 So.2d at 948 (quoting Sharpe). The transcript from the suppression hearing indicates the officer summoned the K-9 unit contemporaneously with or very soon after bringing the defendant into the private office. The 60-min-ute delay was, therefore, not attributable to any lack of diligence on the part of the officer. Although a 60-minute detention is certainly not brief, Louisiana courts have upheld detentions of similar duration when the detaining officers diligently pursued their investigation. | ?E.g., Miller, 00-1657 at p. 5, 798 So.2d at 951 (Court upheld 53-minute detention where officers acted diligently in summoning K-9 unit to search vehicle suspected of transporting marijuana); State v. Burney, 47,056, pp. 11-12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/23/12), 92 So.3d 1184, 1192-93 (extension of lawful traffic stop by approximately 43 minutes from the time defendant refused consent to search of vehicle to the K-9 unit’s arrived was justifiable); State v. Romsky, 01-1067, p. 10 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/10/02), 817 So.2d 186, 192 (60-minute detention justifiable where officer called K-9 unit within 5 minutes of stopping vehicle suspected of transporting narcotics). In sum, a 60-minute detention does not seem unreasonable under the facts of this case.

Additionally, the Trial Court placed great weight on the fact the officer handcuffed the defendant, stating this was unreasonable and transformed the detention into an unlawful arrest. This Court has stated the use of handcuffs during a putative Terry stop is reasonable if the State can “ ‘point to some specific fact or circumstance that could have supported a reasonable belief that the use of such restraints was necessary to carry out the legitimate purposes of the stop without exposing law enforcement officers, the public, or the suspect himself to an undue risk of harm.’” State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 8 (La.11/29/06), 943 So.2d 335, 339 (per curiam) (emphasis added) (citations omitted). In this case, the officer testified he was concerned for his safety as well as the defendant’s safety after the defendant’s repeated outbursts and obstinate refusal to remain seated. Specifically, the officer testified the defendant’s behavior made him and other agents fear the situation was “going to escalate, and in order to prevent any injury to ourselves or to ... [the defendant],” he decided to place the defendant in handcuffs. Although the defendant did not physically threaten the officer, it seems wholly reasonable that the defendant’s erratic, borderline violent behavior would cause the detective |4to fear for his safety. Additionally, the officer could and did lawfully handcuff the defendant to prevent the defendant from being exposed to any undue risk of harm. See e.g., Porche, 06-0312 at p. 7, 943 So.2d at 339 (“Inherent in the right of the police to conduct a brief investigatory detention is also the right to use reasonable force to effectuate the detention.”); United States v. Perdue, 8 F.3d 1455, 1462 (10th Cir.1993) (“Since police officers should not be required to take unnecessary risks in performing their duties ‘they are authorized to take such steps as reasonably necessary to protect their personal safety and to maintain the status quo during the course of [a Terry ] stop.’ ”) (citations omitted).

For the foregoing reasons, the ruling of the Trial Court, granting defendant’s motion to suppress, is hereby reversed. Defendant’s motion to suppress is denied and the ease is remanded to the Trial Court for further proceedings.

JUDGMENT OF TRIAL COURT REVERSED; MOTION DENIED; REMANDED TO DISTRICT COURT.

JOHNSON, C.J., would deny.

WEIMER, J., concurs in part and dissents in part and assigns reasons.

HUGHES, J., concurs in part and dissents in part for the reasons assigned by WEIMER, J.

WEIMER, J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

hi concur in the granting of a writ of review in this matter. However, I dissent in the issuance of a per curiam opinion. The issues in this matter should not be decided without the benefit of briefing and oral argument.

      . TRO Suppression Hr’g Tr. 26, Sept. 21, 2012.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: PER CURIAM.

license: Public Domain

text:
    Sheila GUIDRY v. DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY and the State of Louisiana through the Department of Environmental Quality. Sheila Guidry v. Union Carbide Corporation, et al.
    No. 2012-C-2696.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   PER CURIAM.

1t Writ granted in part. Melissa Bern-iard is disqualified from serving as a class representative. See Stull v. Pool, 63 F.R.D. 702 (S.D.N.Y.1974). In all other respects, the writ is denied. The matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings pursuant to this Order.

WRIT GRANTED IN PART; REMANDED.


author: WEIMER, J.,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Barry Lynn JACOBS.
    No. 2012-KK-2737.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Dec. 20, 2012.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 12-F-1330; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47716-KW.

Writ granted. Given that defendant is charged with an enumerated crime of violence and due to defendant’s lengthy criminal history, including prior acts of violence against the victim of the instant case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the State’s motion to hold defendant without bond. Therefore, the ruling of the trial court, holding defendant without bond pending the resolution of this case, is reinstated.

WEIMER, J.,

dissents.

I would not issue an order in this matter without first providing the defendant an opportunity to submit an opposition.


text:
    Phillip Ray MULKEY v. Vicki Juanita Harris MULKEY.
    No. 2012-CJ-2709.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Dec. 21, 2012.
   In re Mulkey, Phillip Ray; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Franklin, 5th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 34,490C; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47,-748-CA.

' Granted.


author: CLARK, J.,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Shon WILLIAMS.
    No. 2012-KK-2731.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Dec. 21, 2012.
   In re Williams, Shon; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 364-508; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-1715.

Denied.

GUIDRY, J., would grant and docket.

CLARK, J.,

would grant for

consideration of a full analysis under Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288,109 S.Ct. 1060, 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989).


text:
    Oliver George WASHINGTON v. PRESTIGE CARE, L.L.C., et al.
    No. 2012-CC-2753.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Dec. 28, 2012.
   In re Prestige Care d/b/a Femcrest Manor Living; — Defendants-Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. C, No. 02-17287; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-C-1748.

Stay denied; writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Willisa RATLIFF.
    No. 2012-KK-2760.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Jan. 3, 2013.
   In re Ratliff, Willisa; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Vermilion, 15th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 55659; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 12-01293.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Darren ADAMS.
    No. 2013-KK-0004.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Jan. 3, 2013.
   In re Adams, Darren; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 512-095; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-1746.

Stay denied; writ denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    Rommel MLADENOFF v. LOUISIANA MEDICAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0340.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 15, 2013.
   IN RE Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Company, et al.; Pretus M.D., Henry A.; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 696-600; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 13-C-81.

Denied. Relator has an adequate remedy on appeal.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    In re Petition of K.A.T. and D.M.G., etc. K.A.T., et al. v. R.B.F., et al.
    No. 2013-CJ-0321.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 20, 2013.
   In re Guidroz, Duke Matthew; Talbot, Kimberlee Ann; — Other(s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, Nos. 2008-0037, 2010-3279; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Nos. JAC 12-767, CA 12-768.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Angelo HOLMES.
    No. 2013-KK-0370.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 20, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 510-214; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-1503.

Denied.


text:
    SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING, L.L.C. v. Doyelle JANUARY, Assurant Specialty Property, American Security Insurance Company and Capital One Bank.
    No. 2012-CC-2668.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Specialized Loan Servicing, L.L.C.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. A, No. 2010-8894; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-C-1145.

Granted.


text:
    Amy LANDRY v. Emile D. BROUSSARD, M.D., et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0047.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Broussard M.D., Emile et al.; Emile D. Broussard, A Professional Medical Corporation; Young Eye Clinic, A Professional Medical Corporation; — Defendants); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Vermilion, 15th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 93129; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 12-00617.

Granted in part. In the absence of any indication defendants’ writ application was frivolous, the court of appeal, erred in awarding plaintiff attorney fees. See Hampton v. Greenfield, 618 So.2d 859 (La.1993). Accordingly, the award of attorney fees is reversed. In all other respects, the application is denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jefferson KENNEDY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2011-KH-1261.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Kennedy, Jefferson; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 95-532; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 98-KH-1292.

This application is transferred to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal for consideration pursuant to the procedures outlined in that court’s en banc resolution of September 9, 2008. See State v. Cordero, 08-1717(La.10/3/08), 993 So.2d 203.

WEIMER, J.,

concurs in part and

dissents in part for the reasons assigned in State v. Cordero, 08-1717 (La.10/03/08), 993 So.2d 203.

CLARK, J., would deny.


text:
    STATE ex rel. George JONES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2011-KH-2505.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Jones, George: — Plaintiff; Applying for a Motion to Enforce this court’s action dated November 14, 2011; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Section A, No. 245-982; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2011-K-1337.

Denied. Moot. The district court has acted.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Francis BRAUNER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2011-OK-2631.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Francis Brauner; — Plaintiff; Applying for a Motion to Enforce this court’s action dated August 22, 2012, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. K, No. 394-652.

Denied. Moot. The district court has acted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Joseph LINDSAY.
    No. 2012-KP-1349.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Lindsay, Joseph; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 06-3830; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-KH-344.

Denied.


text:
    STATE in the Interest of B.D.
    No. 2012-CK-1489.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re B.D.; — Other; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Orleans Parish Juvenile Court, Nos. 2011-027-01-DQ-F, 2010-102-03-DQ-F; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-C-0603.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Justin SAVOY.
    No. 2012-KP-1514.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Savoy, Justin; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 101521; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 11-00195.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Derrick ODOMS.
    No. 2012-K-1612.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Odoms, Derrick; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. C-448361; to the Court of Appeal, • First Circuit, No. 2011 KA 2092.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Mitchell Glenn WASHINGTON.
    No. 2012-KO-1651.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Washington, Mitchell Glenn; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. 4, No. 286,452; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47,153-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Troy Anthony LeBOUEF.
    No. 2012-KO-1667.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re LeBouef, Troy Anthony; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 571,369; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2011 KA 2025.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Terri COX.
    No. 2012-K-1675.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Cox, Terri; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 08 CR3 97693; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2011 KA 0789.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Craig J. LIRETTE.
    No. 2012-K-1694.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Lirette, Craig J.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 10-5487; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 11-KA-1167.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Edward Charles MULLEN, III v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-1959.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Mullen III, Edward Charles;— Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 895346; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 0648.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Edward L. CHRISTIEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2087.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Christien, Edward L.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 10125-07; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 11-01453.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Kimberlin EDWARDS. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2114.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Edwards, Kimberlin; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. H, Nos. 458662, 437049; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 1281.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael Glen DORSEY, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2118.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Dorsey Jr., Michael Glen; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 348109; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 1141.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Paul M. BATES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2124.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Bates, Paul M.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 69781; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 1142.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Eric McCALL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2126.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re McCall, Eric; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. 4 No. 269,209; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47,724-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Paul Junius FELIX v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2127.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Felix, Paul Junius; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 100,826; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 12-00770.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Thomas BEAMON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2132.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Beamon, Thomas; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 125379; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 12-00871.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Anthony ASHLEY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2134.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Ashley, Anthony; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. 2, No. 258,204; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47,-676-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Simpson WRIGHT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2141.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Wright, Simpson; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 03-1124; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-KH-502.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172. See also State v. Cotton, 09-2397 (La.10/15/10), 45 So.3d 1030.

GUIDRY, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Chester L. REDMOND III v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2142.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Redmond III, Chester L.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 24714; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW1016.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Herman ROBINSON v. STATE of Louisiana
    No. 2012-KH-2155.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Robinson, Herman; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 479-536; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-0945.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Vincent Mark CASTILLO v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2157.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Castillo, Vincent Mark; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 10-1601; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-KH-645.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Byron NEAL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2135.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Neal, Byron; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. C, Nos. 59832, 59709, 61077; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 1294.

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. Edmond D. SPENCER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2164.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Spencer, Edmond; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of West Feliciana, 20th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 12-WCR-312; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 CW 1229.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Daniel W. RICHARDSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2165.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Richardson, Daniel W.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 423936; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012-KW-1245.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Willis RATCLIFF v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2166.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Ratcliff, Willis; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 132-640; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 12-00840.

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. Christopher STEVENSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2184.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Stevenson, Christopher; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 02-F0437; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47,693-KH.

Denied. See R.S. 15:571.15.


text:
    John Joseph GALLOW v. BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE NORTH AMERICAN TIRE, L.L.C., et al.
    No. 2012-CC-2489.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Bridgestone/Firestone American Tire, L.L.C., et al.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 2011-5062; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 12-00938.

Denied.

VICTORY, WEIMER and GUIDRY, JJ., would grant.


text:
    Duane WOOD and Torrie Wood v. Dr. Shawn HUMPHRIES and Lady of the Sea General Hospital.
    No. 2012-C-2712.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Wood, Duane et al.; Wood, Tor-rie; — Plaintiff(s); Applying - For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of La-fourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 107,009; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2011 CA 2161.

Denied.

JOHNSON, C. J., would grant.

KNOLL, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Randy Paul DAVIS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2748.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Davis, Randy Paul; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Natchitoches, 10th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 19494-B; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 12-01214.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.


text:
    SUCCESSION OF Kenneth Eugene CARROLL.
    No. 2012-CC-2755.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Carroll, Jason et al.; Carroll, Kenneth; Carroll, Stephen, Urrate, Carroll;— Other(s); Applying For, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 645-592; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-C-752.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. David Horace LEONARD.
    No. 2012-KK-2758.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Leonard, David Horace; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 01602-11; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 12-01090.

Denied.


text:
    Scott GAILEY v. John L. BARNETT, JCL Enterprises, LLC, United Agents Insurance Co. of Louisiana, Jacqueline Cleggett Lucas & State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
    No. 2012-C-2761.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Barnett, John L. et al.; State Farm Fire and Casualty Company; — Defendants); Applying For Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. M, No. 2001-04786; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0830.

Denied.


text:
    Stephen B. MURRAY d/b/a the Murray Law Firm v. Linda S. HARANG and the Law Offices of Linda S. Harang, L.L.C.
    No. 2012-C-2762.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Stephen B. Murray d/b/a The Murray Law Firm; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. K, No. 08-11321; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0384.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.


text:
    Steve Wayne POURCIAU, Charlotte M. Pourciau & Steve Wayne Pourciau on Behalf of His Minor Child, Taylor Wayne Pourciau v. ECCO NINO, INC. d/b/a Nino’s Restaurant, ABC Insurance Company, Wings Three LA, L.L.C. d/b/a Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar, DEF Insurance Company, Equity One (Louisiana Portfolio) LLC, GHI Insurance Company.
    No. 2012-C-2765.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Wings Three LA, L.L.C. d/b/a Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. C564575; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2011 CA 1789.

Denied.


text:
    Sharon LECROY, individually and on behalf of Brandy Cook v. BYRD REGIONAL HOSPITAL, et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0007.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Alammar M.D., Hussein; Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Company; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Vernon, 30th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 79099; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 12-00958.

Denied.


text:
    Kevin LEJEUNE v. BELAIRE DESIGN, LLC, et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0010.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Rig Fabrication and Repair, Inc.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Martin, 16th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 76,074; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 12-00798.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Cornelius DYSON.
    No. 2013-KK-0011.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. D, No. 509-834; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-1257.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    Desmone WILLIAMS, Jerrica Williams, and Leslie R. Williams v. Jessica Dawn ROBERTS, Horace Mann Ins. Co., Patrick D. Collins, Calvin M. Cameron, Patrick A. Faust, United Services Automobile Association, and Kalbee House, LLC d/b/a Club Zydeco.
    No. 2013-CC-0014.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Williams, Desmone et al.; Williams, Jerrica; Williams, Leslie R.;— Plaintiffs); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 592,841; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 CW1520.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Leonard SCHOENBERGER.
    No. 2013-KK-0016.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Schoenberger, Leonard; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 519115; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 1848.

Denied on showing made.

WEIMER and HUGHES, JJ„ would grant.


text:
    Debbie Johnson, Wife of/and Noel B. SCOTT v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY.
    No. 2013-CC-0017.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, Jefferson First Parish Court, No. 152-012; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-C-810.

Denied.

VICTORY, CLARK and HUGHES, JJ„ would grant.


text:
    Roland S. WAGUESPACK and Carol Waguespack v. Dr. I. Ricardo MARTINEZ, Jr., Mrs. Dolly-Dean Martinez and the American-Georgian Academy of Medicine and Surgery, Inc.
    No. 2013-C-0019.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Waguespack, Carol; Waguespack, Roland S. et al.; — Plaintiff (s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. D, No. 1998-10563; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0218.

Denied.


text:
    Clyde H. LEBLANC, Joanne Leblanc v. 1555 POYDRAS CORPORATION, Lafayette Insurance Company.
    No. 2012-C-2768.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Lafayette Insurance Company;— Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. M, No. 2009-1876; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0597.

Denied.


text:
    Paige Eaglin OKPALOBI v. LEBORNE II, L.L.C.
    No. 2013-C-0020.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Okpalobi, Paige Eaglin; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. A, No. 2008-05521; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0804.

Denied.


text:
    FIRST BANK & TRUST v. Todd J. TEDESCO, et al.
    No. 2013-C-0021.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Tedesco, Todd J. et al.; Todd Tedesco Investments, LLC; — Defendants); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. F, No. 2010-08300; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0774.

Denied.


text:
    John Henry SANDLIN, et al. v. ABC INS. CO., et al.
    No. 2013-C-0023.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Sandlin, John Henry; — Plaintiff; Applying- For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson Davis, Blst Judicial District Court Div. O, No. C-108-10; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CA12-725.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.


text:
    Norris WARNER and Vincent Truehill v. Malcolm COLLINS.
    No. 2013-C-0032.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Truehill, Vincent; Warner, Norris; — Plaintiff(s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. L, No. 2011-08627; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0773.

Denied.


text:
    Cassandra CHARK v. THOMPSON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
    No. 2013-C-0042.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Chark, Cassandra; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 237,114; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Nos. 12-692,12-749.

Denied.


text:
    JOHN PAUL SAPIR, LLC v. YUM! BRANDS, INC., Phil Stein, and 2645 Tulane, LLC.
    No. 2013-C-0043.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re John Paul Sapir LLC; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2009-08799; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0824.

Denied.


author: CLARK and HUGHES, JJ.,

text:
    Jason D. DUGAS v. AUTOZONE, INC., et al.
    No. 2013-C-0045.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Firestone Complete Auto Care;— Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation, No. 10-10031; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. WCA 12-727.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

CLARK and HUGHES, JJ.,

would grant in part on issue of attorney fees, otherwise deny.


text:
    Ernest and Irene LEE. v. Courtney John RHODES, et al.
    No. 2013-C-0048.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Lee, Ernest et al.; Lee, Irene;— Plaintiff(s); Applying For Writ of Certio-rari and/or Review, Parish of Concordia, 7th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 45055; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CA 12-611.

Denied.


text:
    Aaron PROVOST, et ux. v. HOMES BY LAWRENCE & PAULINE, INC., et al.
    No. 2013-C-0049.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Provost et ux., Aaron; Provost, Holly; — Plaintiffs); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Landry, 27th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 06-C-3132-A; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CA 12-761.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.


text:
    Jason D. MARZE v. Michael COLE, et al.
    No. 2013-C-0050.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Marze, Jason D.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 240,251; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CA 12-717.

Denied.

HUGHES, J:, would grant.


text:
    Gary AYO v. BEO CONTRACTORS, INC.
    No. 2013-C-0052.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Ayo, Gary; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers Compensation District 04, No. 10-05478; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 12-630.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Stanley BERNIARD.
    No. 2013-KK-0053.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. L, No. 505-697; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-1549.

Denied.


text:
    Paulette STALL v. SYNTHES INCORPORATED, et al. Paulette Stall v. Synthes Inc., et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0055.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Burger, M.D., Evalina; State of Louisiana through Board of Supervisors of Louisiana University and Agricultural and Mechanical College; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. A, No. 2012-2660; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Nos. 2012-C-1489, 2012-C-1490.

Denied.


text:
    GRAVITY DRAINAGE DISTRICT 8 OF WARD 1 v. LARRY DOIRON, INC., Broussard Construction Co. of Acadiana, LLC, and Western Surety Company. Broussard Construction Company of Acadiana, LLC, Individually and as Subrogee of Larry Doiron, Inc. v. Gravity Drainage District 8 of Ward 1.
    No. 2013-C-0075.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Broussard Construction Company of Acadiana LLC; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. E, Nos. 2009-8889, 2009-4425; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Nos. 12-559,12-560.

Denied.


text:
    Sandra AHMED v. HOME DEPOT.
    No. 2013-C-0083.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In Re The Home Depot Inc.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation District 04, No. 12-03375; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 12-1271.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Esteban Rodriguez CARRILLO v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2013-KH-0266.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re Carrillo, Esteban Rodriguez;— Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Natchitoches, 10th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. C17687; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 13-00041.

Denied.


text:
    John JOHNSON, et al. v. Harriet Fleming RAY and Nursefinders, Inc. Desiree Johnson v. Jens Eichorn, M.D., The Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund d/b/a Tulane University Health Science Center or Tulane University School of Medicine, Nursefinders, Inc. and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, PA.
    No. 2013-C-0024.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
   In re National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburg Pa.; Nursefmders, Inc.; — Defendants); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. E, No. 2004-02500 C/W 2009-06409; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0006 C/W 2012-CA-0007.

Denied.


text:
    In re Kristie LESLIE.
    No. 2013-OB-0186.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 26, 2013.
   In re Leslie, Kristie M.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Permission to Take Bar Examination.

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, § 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:
    James J. BASCLE, et al. v. ANCO INSULATION, et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0446.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 27, 2013.
   In re Onebeacon America Insurance Company; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 11-09255; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2013-C-0201.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    SWEENEY LAW FIRM, LLC v. Steven K. SCHILLING. Sweeney Law Firm, LLC., Neil Sweeney and Sweeney & Miller, LLC. v. Steven K. Schilling and Christopher L. Whittington, et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0383.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 27, 2013.
   In re Neil Sweeney; Sweeney Law Firm, LLC, et al.; — Plaintiffis); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 585,608 C/W 589,869; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 CW 1932.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Winona Jean CLARKSON.
    No. 2013-K-0320.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 27, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. 4, No. 300,822; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 48006-KW.

Denied.


text:
    ORACLE OIL, LLC v. WISE WELL INTERVENTION SERVICES INC. and ABC Insurance Company.
    No. 2013-CC-0410.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 27, 2013.
   In re Lexington Insurance Company;— Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 584023; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 CW 2030.

Stay denied. Writ denied


text:
    ORACLE OIL, LLC v. WISE WELL INTERVENTION SERVICES INC. and ABC Insurance Company.
    No. 2013-CC-0411.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 27, 2013.
   In re Lexington Insurance Company;— Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 584023; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 CW 2031.

Stay denied. Writ denied

VICTORY and HUGHES, JJ., would grant.


text:
    Daniel MILBERT, et al. v. ANSWERING BUREAU, INC.
    No. 2013-C-0022.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Milbert, Daniel et al.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. C-20097787; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 12-632.

Granted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Anthony THOMAS.
    No. 2012-KP-1410.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 06-98-0834; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 0477.

Granted.


text:
    William Michael HANLON, Jr. et al. v. MONSANTO AG PRODUCTS, LLC, Delta Pine and Land Company, Pharmacia Corporation, Tensas Farm Services, Inc., Helena Chemical Company, and Crop Production Services, Inc.
    No. 2013-CC-0169.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Crop Production Services, Inc.; Helena Chemical Company; Jimmy Sanders, Inc.; Monsanto AG Products, LLC; Tensas Farm Services, Inc.; — Defendants); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Madison, 6th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 11-296; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 48010-CW.

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


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ron PETERSON.
    No. 2012-KO-1620.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Peterson, Ron; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 503203; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2011 KA 2292.

Granted. This case is remanded to the court of appeal for consideration of defendant’s excessive sentence claim. Given defendant’s initial motion to reconsider when the court imposed its original sentence, counsel’s objection at the close of the habitual offender hearing to the “harsh” sentence imposed by the court which significantly increased defendant’s term of imprisonment adequately preserved a bare claim of excessiveness for review. Cf. State v. Chisolm, 99-1055, p. 10 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/27/00), 771 So.2d 205, 212 (failure to file motion to reconsider sentence following habitual offender adjudication waived review for excessive on appeal although defendant moved to reconsider sentence originally imposed, but specifically noting that “no oral objection was made to the sentence at the multiple bill hearing.”), writ denied, 00-2965 (La.9/28/01), 798 So.2d 106.

CLARK, J., would deny.

HUGHES, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Robert WILKINS.
    No. 2012-K-1712.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 19337-04; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 11-1395.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Larry J. McKITHERN.
    No. 2012-KO-1653.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re McKithern, Larry J.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. B, Nos. 3678-11, 25391-09; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Nos. 11-1402,11-1111.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Christopher Henry JOSEPH.
    No. 2012-KO-1652.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Joseph, Christopher Henry; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 22090-OS; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Nos. 11-1583,11-1583.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Damon David CALISTE.
    No. 2012-KP-1648.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Caliste, Damon David; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 460590; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 0590.

Denied.

JOHNSON, C.J. and HUGHES, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Robert L. WYMORE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2037.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Wymore, Robert L.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated January 25, 2013, and from Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Court Div. D, Nos. 79-065, 78-215; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-KH-599.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT v. TRIANGLE PROPERTY, LLC, et al.
    No. 2013-C-0184.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation & Development; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Catahoula, 7th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 25,273; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 12-564.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    Larry ALLEN, et al. v. STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY & CORRECTIONS, et al.
    No. 2013-C-0107.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Allen, Larry et al.; Jones, Victor; Roy, Evan Peter; Wesley, Fred Allen; Wright, Maurice Johndell; — Plaintiff(s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 2009-4146; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 12-430.

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


text:
    Succession of Mary E. JACOB, et al. v. DEAR’S SERENITY HOUSE, LLC et al.
    No. 2013-CC-0138.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Dear’s Serenity House, LLC; Proassurance Specialty Insurance Co., Inc.; Wilson, Alicia V.; Wilson, Kate Temple; Maronge, Jonathan; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. I, No. 11-13071; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-C-1574.

Granted. The original plaintiff must have a right of action for an amending petition to be able to relate back. See Delaney v. Amite Homes, Inc., 12-1640 (La.10/26/12), 101 So.3d 445. It is undisputed that the administratrix did not have a right of action to assert claims for wrongful death and survival action. Therefore, the administratrix’s suit could not have interrupted prescription on Mr. Maronge’s claims. Accordingly, the writ is granted, and the judgment of the district court denying relator’s exceptions is reversed.

JOHNSON, C.J., would deny the writ.

KNOLL and WEIMER, JJ., would deny the writ.


text:
    Belinda Jan Pitchford CALVIT v. PERKINS ROWE ASSOCIATES, LLC, Bradley Electrical Services, LLC, and John S. Clark Company, LLC.
    No. 2013-CC-0148.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re America First Insurance Company; Bradley Electrical Service, LLC; John S. Clark Company, LLC; — Defendants); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 578,793; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 CW 1687.

Granted. The district court did not abuse its great discretion in granting the motion in limine. Accordingly, the judgment of the-court of appeal is reversed, and the judgment of the district court is reinstated. Case remanded to the district court for further proceedings.

HUGHES, J., would deny.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Demond TANNER a/k/a Julien Brice.
    No. 2012-KO-1764.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Demond Tanner A/K/A Julien Brice; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 09-4179; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. ll-KW-62.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Jamie HUBBARD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2159.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Hubbard,' Jamie; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Landry, 27th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 06-K-1931-D; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 11-01396.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Roy Anthony SINCLAIR v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2158.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Sinclair, Roy Anthony; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Bienville, 2nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 36,087; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47,-726-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. James Dennis WILSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2144.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Wilson, James Dennis; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Bossier, -26th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 11-3226-B; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 47,539-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Lawrence Ray PITTMAN, Sr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2140.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Pittman Sr., Lawrence Ray;— Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2011-00955; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0468.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana in the Interest of A.D.
    No. 2012-CK-1916.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Other; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Juvenile Court for the Parish of Orleans, No. 2011-020-05-DQ-F; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-CA-0258.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gary L. COPP.
    No. 2012-KP-1863.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Copp, Gary L.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 412974; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 0830.

Denied.

HUGHES, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Prudence LEGER.
    No. 2012-K-1851.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Leger, Prudence; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Lafayette, Lafayette City Court, No. DT 2011-00395; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 12-00676.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gerald M. HOWARD.
    No. 2012-KO-1826.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Howard, Gerald M.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 07-7279; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 11-KA-1155.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Vin J. ENNIS.
    No. 2012-KO-1799.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Ennis, Vin J.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 496-976; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2011-KA-0976.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Frederick LEDAY.
    No. 2012-KO-1765.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Leday, Frederick; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. 10-113; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, Nos. 11-KA-1022,12-KA-54.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gerald TREADWAY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2207.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Treadway, Gerald; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 05-5924; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-KH-542.

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


text:
    STATE ex rel. Ronald MORGAN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2206.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Morgan, Ronald; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 03 — 4931; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 12-KH-622.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Thaddeus A. WILLIAMSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2205.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Williamson, Thaddeus A.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 404,770; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 1182.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Arlen BROWN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2199.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Brown, Arlen; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 10949; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 KW 1019.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Beatrice CHISOLM v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2198.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Chisolm, Beatrice; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 384-200; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-1249.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Cassondra LEVERT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2197.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Levert, Cassondra; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, Nos. 268-468, 268-685.

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. Derrick Jerome ALLEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2012-KH-2190.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 1, 2013.
   In re Allen, Derrick Jerome; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of W. Baton Rouge, 18th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 38,619; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2012 CA 0529.

Denied.

WEIMER and HUGHES, JJ., recused.


author: WILLIAMS, J.

text:
    SHREVEPORT POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants. v. Honorable Cedric GLOVER, Appointing Authority for the City of Shreveport, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 47,504-CA.
    Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.
    Jan. 9, 2013.
    Rehearing Denied Feb. 21, 2018.

      Pamela R. Jones, Shreveport, LA, for Appellants.
    Edwin H. Byrd, III, Shreveport, LA, for Appellee, City of Shreveport.

      Mary E. Winehell, Shreveport, LA, for Appellee, Municipal Fire and Police Civil Service Board.
    David G. Sanders, Bridget B. Denicola, Assistant Attorneys General, for Appellee, Honorable James D. Caldwell, Attorney General.
    David G. Sanders, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellee, Melinda Livingston, State Examiner.
    Before BROWN, WILLIAMS and LOLLEY, JJ.
   WILLIAMS, J.

hThe plaintiffs, Shreveport Police Officers Association and Michael Carter, appeal a judgment denying their motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment in favor of the City of Shreveport and the Louisiana attorney general. The district court determined that LSA-R.S. 38:2481.4 was constitutional. For the following reasons, we affirm.

FACTS

In 2010, the Louisiana legislature passed by a two-thirds vote of each house LSA-R.S. 88:2481.4, which authorizes the creation of the position of deputy chief of police within certain municipal civil service systems, including that of Shreveport. Pursuant to the law, the police chief would appoint a deputy chief from a competitive list. The deputy would be evaluated after serving three years, at which time the deputy could be retained for another three years or removed by the police chief and returned to his previous rank. In 2011, the City of Shreveport (“the City”) enacted ordinance 43, creating the position of deputy chief of police for the City.

The plaintiffs, Shreveport Police Officers Association (“SPOA”) and Michael Carter, individually and as president of SPOA, filed a petition for declaratory judgment against the defendants, the City, Mayor Cedric Glover, Shreveport Police Chief Willie Shaw, the Shreveport Municipal Fire and Police Civil Service Board and Melinda Livingston, in her capacity as State Examiner. The plaintiffs’ petition sought a judicial declaration that LSA-R.S. 33:2481.4 and Shreveport Ordinance 43 violate their equal protection rights under La. Const. Art. I, sec. 3, and violate La. Const. Art. X, sec. 18, which prohibits the legislature from abolishing the fire and police civil | gservice system. The petition was served on the Louisiana Attorney General.

Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment declaring that Section 2481.4 and Shreveport Ordinance 43 are unconstitutional, alleging that the statutes effectively abolish the civil service system and violate their equal protection rights. The City and the attorney general filed separate motions for summary judgment declaring that the statutes are constitutional. After a hearing on the motions, the district court issued oral reasons for judgment. The court concluded that Section 2481.4 and Shreveport Ordinance 43 are constitutional, finding that the statutes did not abolish the civil service system or violate the due process rights of the plaintiffs. The court rendered judgment denying the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment in favor of the City and the attorney general. The plaintiffs appeal the judgment.

DISCUSSION

In three assignments of error, the plaintiffs contend the district court erred in finding that the statute authorizing the City to create the deputy chief position is constitutional. Plaintiffs first argue that the statute violates the state constitution by creating a nonpermanent position that can be renewed or rescinded at the police chiefs discretion.

The Louisiana Constitution mandates a system of police civil service applicable to the City. La. Const. Art. X, § 16; LSA-R.S. 33:2475. Permanent appointments and promotions in municipal police civil service shall be made only after certification by the police civil service board under a general system “based upon merit, efficiency, fitness and length of [{¡service” as provided in Art. XIV, sec. 15.1 of the 1921 Constitution, subject to change by law that is enacted by two-thirds of each house of the legislature. La. Const. Art. X, sec. 17. The provisions of Art. XIV, sec. 15.1 of the 1921 Constitution are retained and continued in effect as statutes. The legislature, by two-thirds vote of each house, “may amend or otherwise modify any of those provisions, but it may not abolish the system of classified civil service” for such municipal policemen. La. Const. Art. X, § 18. Civil service statutes are meant to secure adequate protection to career public employees from political pressure. Owen v. City of Shreveport, 29,990 (La.App.2d Cir.1/21/98), 705 So.2d 795.

When a constitutional provision is clear and unambiguous, and its application does not lead to absurd consequences, it must be applied as written without any further interpretation in search of its intent. In ascertaining the intent, general purpose and meaning of a constitutional provision, or a part thereof, it should be construed as a whole. Succession of Lauga, 624 So.2d 1156 (La.1993).

LSA-R.S. 33:2481.4 provides in pertinent part:

A. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the governing authority may create, by ordinance, the position of deputy chief of police in accordance with the provisions of this Section. The position shall be filled on a competitive basis from a list of eligibles ... and the right of selection, appointment, supervision, and discharge for such position shall be vested in the chief of police, subject to approval of the appointing authority. In addition, the governing authority shall establish the duties and responsibilities of the deputy chief of police in the ordinance creating the position. Such duties and responsibilities may include direct supervision over all positions in the classified service below the rank of chief of police. The position of deputy chief of police is not the same as the position of Lassistant chief of police as provided in R.S. 33:2481(A)(1).
B. (1) The deputy chief of police shall have not less than eight years of full time law enforcement experience and shall at least hold the rank of sergeant in the classified police service at the time of his appointment.

The deputy chief of police shall serve indefinitely in the classified competitive position and shall be evaluated every three years by the police chief. After each evaluation, the police chief may, at his discretion, reconfirm the deputy chief for another three year period or demote the deputy to his former class of positions. LSA-R.S. 33:2481.4(0(1).

In their brief, the plaintiffs allege that the core principles of the classified system for police are permanent appointment and promotion based on merit and length of service. Plaintiffs argue that the provision giving a police chief discretion to remove the deputy after three years abrogates these core principles and is unconstitutional.

Regarding the discretion given to the police chief in the statute, we note that the civil service law also gives discretion to the appointing authority in other situations. For example, in making appointments for competitive positions, the appointing authority is not required to promote by seniority, but has much discretion in choosing employees certified as eligible for promotion by the civil service board. Lawson v. State DHH, 618 So.2d 1002 (La.App. 1st Cir.1998); Blake v. Giarrusso, 263 So.2d 392 (La.App. 4th Cir.1972); Sewell v. New Orleans Police Department, 221 So.2d 621 (La.App. 4th Cir.1969).

Specifically, Section 2481.4 provides that the position of deputy chief |sof police shall be filled on a competitive basis from a list of eligible persons compiled by the police civil service board and requires that the deputy have not less than eight years of law enforcement experience. These statutory provisions are consistent with the plain language of La. Const. Art. X, Sec. 17, which requires that promotions in the police civil service be made only after certification by the police civil service board under a general system based on merit and length of service. Thus, plaintiffs have not shown that the discretion given to the appointing authority in evaluating a deputy’s performance conflicts with the constitution.

Additionally, plaintiffs contend the statutory provision making the deputy position subject to three-year evaluations essentially creates a prohibited contract for personnel services, citing Parker & Assoc., Inc. v. State Dept. of Civil Service, 454 So.2d 162 (La.App. 1st Cir.1984). However, the present ease does not involve a contract for services with a third party, such as the contract at issue in Parker, supra. The statute provides that at the time of appointment, the deputy chief must at least be a sergeant in the classified police service. As a result, the deputy will always be a classified employee, not a private contractor hired to replace a protected worker. Thus, the record supports the trial court’s finding that the evaluation requirement did not constitute an employment contract that displaced a classified worker.

The plaintiffs also argue that Section 2481.4 is effectively a return to the spoils system, because the police chief can “reward” the deputy chief with an increase in salary and the resulting greater retirement benefits. | (¡However, the plaintiffs did not show that an increased salary for the deputy chief is more damaging to the civil service system than a salary increase for those appointed to other positions, such as assistant chief. Based upon the law and the record in this case, the plaintiffs have failed to prove that the statutory provisions have the effect of abrogating worker protections to the extent of abolishing the civil service system. Thus, the assignment of error lacks merit.

Seniority

The plaintiffs assert that the statute disrupts seniority for promotions in the classified service by allowing the deputy chief to continue to accumulate seniority. Plaintiffs argue that this provision is unfair to other classified employees because the person serving as deputy chief is “outside” of the classified service. LSA-R.S. 33:2481.4 provides in pertinent part:

C. (1) Any person who is appointed from a position in the classified police service to serve as deputy chief of police shall not forfeit his seniority accumulated to the date of his appointment, and he shall continue to accumulate seniority ... during the time he holds the position of deputy chief of police.

The plaintiffs’ argument is not supported by the Municipal Fire and Police Civil Service Law, which provides that the classified service shall include every position that is subject to appointment by a municipal government employee, with the primary responsibility of law enforcement or crime prevention and investigation. LSA-R.S. 38:2481(A). Thus, contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the deputy chief position is included in the classified service, because the police chief, a government employee, has the right of appointment and law enforcement is a primary duty of the 17position. In addition, because the deputy would accrue the same seniority as if he had remained in his prior rank, the plaintiffs have not demonstrated that Section 2481.4 would be unfairly prejudicial to other classified employees. The assignment of error lacks merit.

Equal Protection

The plaintiffs contend the minimum rank requirement is arbitrary and violates the equal protection guarantee of the Louisiana Constitution. The plaintiffs argue that the rank requirement serves no appropriate state interest because in cities like Shreveport, where one can apply for the police chief position without regard to rank, a person could qualify to apply for the position of chief, but not for the subordinate position of deputy chief.

No person shall be denied the equal protection of the law. No law shall discriminate against a person because of race or religious beliefs and no law shall arbitrarily or unreasonably discriminate against a person because of birth, age, sex, culture, physical condition, or political ideas or affiliations. La. Const. Art. I, § 3. Under this constitutional provision, the courts are required to decline enforcement of a legislative act in three situations: (1) if the law classifies individuals by race or religious beliefs, it must be repudiated completely; (2) if the statute classifies persons on the basis of birth, age, sex, culture, physical condition, or political ideas, it should not be enforced unless the state demonstrates a reasonable basis for such classification; and (3) if the law classifies individuals on any other basis, it should not be enforced when any member of a disadvantaged class shows that the legislative act does not suitably further any appropriate state Isinterest. Sibley v. Bd. of Supervisors of LSU, 477 So.2d 1094 (La.1985); Morgan v. City of Shreveport, 46,362 (La.App.2d Cir.7/13/11), 71 So.3d 1104. The equal protection clause does not require absolute equality or precisely equal advantages, but mandates that the law treat alike all persons and interests similarly situated. Beaudaire v. Greenhouse, 05-0765 (La.2/22/06), 922 So.2d 501.

In the present case, the statute provides that the deputy chief of police shall have not less than eight years of full-time law enforcement experience and shall hold at least the rank of sergeant at the time of appointment. LSA-R.S. 33:2481.4(B)(1). The statute does not classify individuals on the basis of race, religion, age, political affiliations or any other protected category. Thus, the plaintiffs have the burden of proving that the rank requirement is not rational and does not further any appropriate state interest.

In their brief, the plaintiffs complain that the above stated minimum rank requirement does not apply to the position of police chief, that the requirement applies across the state without regard to the size of a municipality’s police department and that in a city of Shreveport’s size, a police officer with eight years experience would not have sufficient seniority to attain the rank of sergeant. They assert that a better method for setting qualifications would be to remove the rank requirement. Although plaintiffs propose a reasonable alternative to the statutory requirements, they have not demonstrated that the legislative act does not suitably further an appropriate state interest.

The evidence presented indicates that Section 2481.4 is rationally | flrelated to the significant state interest in providing adequate public safety through the means of giving local governments the authority to create the position of deputy chief of police, to be selected on a competitive basis. The statutory requirement that the deputy chief hold the minimum rank of sergeant suitably furthers the legitimate governmental interest in having municipal police departments select deputy chiefs with the breadth of experience necessary to properly perform the job. In addition, the rank requirement for the deputy chief position can reasonably be considered a rational alternative to the public confirmation process that occurs in the appointment of a police chief. We also note that even though there is no minimum rank required for the position of police chief, there are other qualifications for that position that are not required for the deputy chief position, such as the time spent in supervisory and administrative positions and level of education.

After considering the applicable law and the record, we conclude that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy their burden of proving that no rational basis can be articulated for the statutory rank requirement. The assignment of error lacks merit. Thus, the district court did not err in ruling that the statute is constitutional and denying the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s judgment is affirmed. Costs of this appeal are assessed to the appellants, Shreveport Police Officers Association and Michael Carter.

AFFIRMED.

APPLICATION FOR REHEARING

Before BROWN, WILLIAMS, STEWART, PITMAN and LOLLEY, JJ.

Rehearing denied.