Friedman v. Friedman

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Friedman v. Friedman

63 So. 3d 127, 2011 La. LEXIS 1687, 2011 WL 2280871

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided June 10, 2011·No. 2011-OC-1192·Published

Opinion

ORDER

Granted. The December 14, 2010, transcript clearly reveals that the trial court ordered the parties to prepare a written judgment. Therefore, the March 29, 2011, written judgment is the “ruling” at issue for purposes of Rule 4-3. See Kosmitis v. Bailey, 96-1573 (La.10/4/96), 680 So.2d 1167. Accordingly, the ruling of the court of appeal is set aside, and the case is remanded to the court of appeal to rule on the merits of the application.

JOHNSON, J., would stay the hearing and obtain an opposition.

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

ORDER

Granted. The December 14, 2010, transcript clearly reveals that the trial court ordered the parties to prepare a written judgment. Therefore, the March 29, 2011, written judgment is the “ruling” at issue for purposes of Rule 4-3. See Kosmitis v. Bailey, 96-1573 (La.10/4/96), 680 So.2d 1167. Accordingly, the ruling of the court of appeal is set aside, and the case is remanded to the court of appeal to rule on the merits of the application.

JOHNSON, J., would stay the hearing and obtain an opposition.

Friedman v. Friedman, 63 So. 3d 127, 2011 La. LEXIS 1687, 2011 WL 2280871 (La. 2011).

Pincite

63 So. 3d 127 (Friedman v. Friedman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related