Lee v. Allstate Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Lee v. Allstate Insurance Co.

483 So. 2d 146, 1986 La. LEXIS 5798

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedFebruary 28, 1986

DocketNo. 86-CC-0367

StatusPublished

This text of 483 So. 2d 146 (Lee v. Allstate Insurance Co.) 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

Lee v. Allstate Insurance Co., 483 So. 2d 146, 1986 La. LEXIS 5798 (La. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Lee, Theodore C. Jr.; applying for stay, supervisory writ; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court, Div. “C”, No. 82-3961; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. C-5209.

Denied in part and granted in part. The request for continuance is denied. The ruling of the trial judge (if he has so ruled) that the “new-found” witnesses may not testify is modified, and plaintiff shall be permitted to make a record, before the trial begins, out of the presence of the jury, of the testimony of the new-found witnesses, and of any evidence relevant to the exclusion of the testimony as a violation of the pre-trial order. The trial judge may then issue such orders as he deems appropriate in the interest of justice.

LEMMON, J., would allow the testimony or, in the alternative, grant the continuance.

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

In re Lee, Theodore C. Jr.; applying for stay, supervisory writ; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court, Div. “C”, No. 82-3961; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. C-5209.

Denied in part and granted in part. The request for continuance is denied. The ruling of the trial judge (if he has so ruled) that the “new-found” witnesses may not testify is modified, and plaintiff shall be permitted to make a record, before the trial begins, out of the presence of the jury, of the testimony of the new-found witnesses, and of any evidence relevant to the exclusion of the testimony as a violation of the pre-trial order. The trial judge may then issue such orders as he deems appropriate in the interest of justice.

LEMMON, J., would allow the testimony or, in the alternative, grant the continuance.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

483 So. 2d 146, 1986 La. LEXIS 5798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-allstate-insurance-co-la-1986.