Grabowski v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

149 So. 3d 1282, 13 La.App. 3 Cir. 1409, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 2332, 2014 WL 4853661
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Grabowski v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 14 La.App. 3 Cir. 333
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided October 1, 2014·No. Nos. 13-1409, 14-433·Published

Opinion

PICKETT, Judge.

|, For the reasons set forth in the companion case hereto, Ed Grabowski, et ux. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al., 14-433 c/w 13-1409, (La.App. 3 Cir.10/1/14), 149 So.3d 899, the writ application is denied. The judgment of the trial court granting the Motion to Close the Record is affirmed. The grants of summary judgment in favor of Smith & Nephew, Inc., PUREPLAY Orthopaedic Sales 1 Ltd., and Daniel Forrest are reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. Costs of the writ application are assessed to the Grabowskis. Costs of the appeal are assessed to Smith & Nephew, Inc. PUREPLAY Orthopaedic Sales 1 Ltd., and Daniel Forrest.

WRIT DENIED. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

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

Grabowski v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 149 So. 3d 1282, 13 La.App. 3 Cir. 1409, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 2332, 2014 WL 4853661 (La. Ct. App. 2014).

149 So. 3d 1282 (Grabowski v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grabowski v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.
149 So. 3d 899 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2014)