Billieson v. City of New Orleans

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Billieson v. City of New Orleans

188 So. 3d 262, 2016 WL 1619909, 2016 La. LEXIS 927

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided April 15, 2016·No. No. 2016-C-0366·Published

Opinion

CRICHTON, J.,

additionally concurs and assigns reasons.

_JjI agree with the majority’s decision to deny the writ, as I believe it lacks Rule X considerations. “The appellate court re[263] views an award of attorney’s fees for an abuse of discretion. The district .court’s factual determinations will not be set aside absent manifest error.” Covington v. McNeese State Univ., 12-2182, p. 6 (La.5/7/13), 118 So.3d 343, 348. (citations omitted). As the applicant has demonstrated no abuse of the trial court’s discretion, I see no reason to impede the lamentably belated conclusion of this epic two-decade litigation.

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

CRICHTON, J.,

additionally concurs and assigns reasons.

_JjI agree with the majority’s decision to deny the writ, as I believe it lacks Rule X considerations. “The appellate court re[263] views an award of attorney’s fees for an abuse of discretion. The district .court’s factual determinations will not be set aside absent manifest error.” Covington v. McNeese State Univ., 12-2182, p. 6 (La.5/7/13), 118 So.3d 343, 348. (citations omitted). As the applicant has demonstrated no abuse of the trial court’s discretion, I see no reason to impede the lamentably belated conclusion of this epic two-decade litigation.

Billieson v. City of New Orleans, 188 So. 3d 262, 2016 WL 1619909, 2016 La. LEXIS 927 (La. 2016).

Pincite

188 So. 3d 262 (Billieson v. City of New Orleans) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related