Donna King Michelli & Eugene J. Michelli, Jr. v. Cleve Dunn, Jr. & Stacy P. Dunn

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Donna King Michelli & Eugene J. Michelli, Jr. v. Cleve Dunn, Jr. & Stacy P. Dunn

DecidedMay 14, 2024

Docket2024CW0163

StatusUnknown

This text of Donna King Michelli & Eugene J. Michelli, Jr. v. Cleve Dunn, Jr. & Stacy P. Dunn (Donna King Michelli & Eugene J. Michelli, Jr. v. Cleve Dunn, Jr. & Stacy P. Dunn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Donna King Michelli & Eugene J. Michelli, Jr. v. Cleve Dunn, Jr. & Stacy P. Dunn, (La. Ct. App. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT DONNA KING MICHELLI AND NO. 2024 CW 0163 EUGENE J. MICHELLI, JR. VERSUS CLEVE DUNN, JR. AND STACY P. MAY 14, 2024 DUNN

In Re: Donna King Michelli and Eugene J. Michelli, Jr., applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 713823.

BEFORE: GUIDRY, C.J., CHUTZ, PENZATO, LANIER AND HESTER, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The trial court's January 23, 2024 Order, which granted the (third) Motion to Recuse Judge Beau Higginbotham from Further Presiding Over the Above-Captioned Matter filed by defendants, Cleve Dunn, Jr. and Stacy P. Dunn, is reversed. A party desiring to recuse a judge of a district court shall file a written motion therefor assigning the ground for recusal under Article 151. La. Code Ci v. P. art. 154 (A) . This motion shall be filed no later than thirty days after discovery of the facts constituting the ground upon which the motion is based, but in all cases prior to the scheduling of the matter for trial. Id. In the event that the facts cons ti tu ting the ground upon which the motion to recuse is based occur after the matter is scheduled for trial or the party moving for recusal could not, in the exercise of due diligence, have discovered such facts, the motion to recuse shall be filed immediately after such facts occur or are discovered. Id. The facts constituting the ground upon which the (third) Motion to Recuse was based, i.e. the filing of a lawsuit by Cleve Dunn, Jr. naming of Judge Higginbotham as a defendant, occurred on September 5, 2023, which was after the trial of this matter. Because the (third) Motion to Recuse was not filed until November 20, 2023, it was untimely, under the facts and circumstances presented in this case, and is denied.

WRC AHP WIL CHH

Guidry, C.J., dissents and would deny the writ application.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

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

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT DONNA KING MICHELLI AND NO. 2024 CW 0163 EUGENE J. MICHELLI, JR. VERSUS CLEVE DUNN, JR. AND STACY P. MAY 14, 2024 DUNN

In Re: Donna King Michelli and Eugene J. Michelli, Jr., applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 713823.

BEFORE: GUIDRY, C.J., CHUTZ, PENZATO, LANIER AND HESTER, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The trial court's January 23, 2024 Order, which granted the (third) Motion to Recuse Judge Beau Higginbotham from Further Presiding Over the Above-Captioned Matter filed by defendants, Cleve Dunn, Jr. and Stacy P. Dunn, is reversed. A party desiring to recuse a judge of a district court shall file a written motion therefor assigning the ground for recusal under Article 151. La. Code Ci v. P. art. 154 (A) . This motion shall be filed no later than thirty days after discovery of the facts constituting the ground upon which the motion is based, but in all cases prior to the scheduling of the matter for trial. Id. In the event that the facts cons ti tu ting the ground upon which the motion to recuse is based occur after the matter is scheduled for trial or the party moving for recusal could not, in the exercise of due diligence, have discovered such facts, the motion to recuse shall be filed immediately after such facts occur or are discovered. Id. The facts constituting the ground upon which the (third) Motion to Recuse was based, i.e. the filing of a lawsuit by Cleve Dunn, Jr. naming of Judge Higginbotham as a defendant, occurred on September 5, 2023, which was after the trial of this matter. Because the (third) Motion to Recuse was not filed until November 20, 2023, it was untimely, under the facts and circumstances presented in this case, and is denied.

WRC AHP WIL CHH

Guidry, C.J., dissents and would deny the writ application.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Donna King Michelli & Eugene J. Michelli, Jr. v. Cleve Dunn, Jr. & Stacy P. Dunn, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donna-king-michelli-eugene-j-michelli-jr-v-cleve-dunn-jr-stacy-p-lactapp-2024.