Clark v. Matthews

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Clark v. Matthews

948 So. 2d 186, 2007 La. LEXIS 372, 2007 WL 628189

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided February 2, 2007·No. No. 2006-CC-2921·Published

Opinion

In re Clark, Jeffrey W.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. O, No. 566-788; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-C-601.

Granted. Although the trial court set the return date more than thirty days from the date of the ruling, the court has authority to extend the deadline under Rule 4-3. Relator’s application, filed within the time limit authorized by the trial court, is timely. See Barnard v. Barnard, 96-0859 (La.6/24/96), 675 So.2d 734. Accordingly, the application is remanded to the court of appeal for consideration on the merits.

KIMBALL, J., would deny. TRAYLOR, J., would deny.

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

In re Clark, Jeffrey W.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. O, No. 566-788; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-C-601.

Granted. Although the trial court set the return date more than thirty days from the date of the ruling, the court has authority to extend the deadline under Rule 4-3. Relator’s application, filed within the time limit authorized by the trial court, is timely. See Barnard v. Barnard, 96-0859 (La.6/24/96), 675 So.2d 734. Accordingly, the application is remanded to the court of appeal for consideration on the merits.

KIMBALL, J., would deny. TRAYLOR, J., would deny.

Clark v. Matthews, 948 So. 2d 186, 2007 La. LEXIS 372, 2007 WL 628189 (La. 2007).

Pincite

948 So. 2d 186 (Clark v. Matthews) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related