Home/Louisiana Court of Appeal/Garrison v. St. Charles General Hospital

Garrison v. St. Charles General Hospital

847 So. 2d 688, 2002 La.App. 4 Cir. 2268, 2003 La. App. LEXIS 1363, 2003 WL 21054376
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Garrison v. St. Charles General Hospital. Read the opinion of the Court — 2002 La.App. 4 Cir. 1430 →
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided May 7, 2003·No. Nos. 2002-C-2268, 2002-C-2269, 2002-C-2270, 2002-C-2271, 2002-C-2278, 2002-C-2295, 2002-C-2296, 2002-C-2311, 2002-C-2312·Published

Opinion

JOAN BERNARD ARMSTRONG, Judge.

These consolidated writ applications are denied.

Under the most recent case law of this court, which is controlling on this panel, the class action allegations of the petition, and the fact that there has not yet been a hearing and ruling as to class certification, are indeed relevant to the exceptions of venue and cumulation of actions. Thomas v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2002-1904, 4 cir. 03/19/03, 843 So.2d 504 (La.App. 2003). Therefore, the trial court should address the exceptions of improper cumulation of actions, and may revisit the exceptions of improper venue, after or in conjunction with a hearing and ruling upon class certification.

WRIT DENIED.

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

Garrison v. St. Charles General Hospital, 847 So. 2d 688, 2002 La.App. 4 Cir. 2268, 2003 La. App. LEXIS 1363, 2003 WL 21054376 (La. Ct. App. 2003).

847 So. 2d 688 (Garrison v. St. Charles General Hospital) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomas v. Mobil Oil Corp.
843 So. 2d 504 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2003)