Bates v. Thomas

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Bates v. Thomas

806 So. 2d 650, 2002 WL 172002

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedFebruary 1, 2002

DocketNo. 2001-CC-2908

StatusPublished

This text of 806 So. 2d 650 (Bates v. Thomas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bates v. Thomas, 806 So. 2d 650, 2002 WL 172002 (La. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Granted. While we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s judgment sanctioning defendant Erroll Thomas for failure to comply with discovery, the sanction chosen by the trial court (entry of judgment by default on the issue of,liability) has an adverse effect on the other defendants under the unique facts of this ease. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is vacated and the case is remanded to the trial court for a less drastic sanction that does not adversely affect the other defendants.

KIMBALL, JOHNSON and KNOLL, JJ., would deny the writ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Granted. While we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s judgment sanctioning defendant Erroll Thomas for failure to comply with discovery, the sanction chosen by the trial court (entry of judgment by default on the issue of,liability) has an adverse effect on the other defendants under the unique facts of this ease. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is vacated and the case is remanded to the trial court for a less drastic sanction that does not adversely affect the other defendants.

KIMBALL, JOHNSON and KNOLL, JJ., would deny the writ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

806 So. 2d 650, 2002 WL 172002, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bates-v-thomas-la-2002.