Crutcher-Tufts Corp. v. Coleman

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Crutcher-Tufts Corp. v. Coleman

170 So. 3d 972, 2015 La. LEXIS 1394, 2015 WL 3616103

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMay 22, 2015

DocketNo. 2015-OC-0340

StatusPublished

This text of 170 So. 3d 972 (Crutcher-Tufts Corp. v. Coleman) 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

Crutcher-Tufts Corp. v. Coleman, 170 So. 3d 972, 2015 La. LEXIS 1394, 2015 WL 3616103 (La. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Alise Durand; Douglas J. Du-rand; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. N, No. 2013-11628; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2014-C-1416.

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. Relators’ 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 ruling of the court of appeal is vacated and set aside, and the application is remanded to the court of appeal for consideration on the merits.

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

In re Alise Durand; Douglas J. Du-rand; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. N, No. 2013-11628; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2014-C-1416.

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. Relators’ 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 ruling of the court of appeal is vacated and set aside, and the application is remanded to the court of appeal for consideration on the merits.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 So. 3d 972, 2015 La. LEXIS 1394, 2015 WL 3616103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crutcher-tufts-corp-v-coleman-la-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack