Lemmon v. Connick
This text of 590 So. 2d 574 (Lemmon v. Connick) 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.
Opinion
J. Roslyn LEMMON
v.
Harry F. CONNICK, District Attorney for the City of New Orleans.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
*575 PER CURIAM.
The writ is granted and the judgment of the court of appeal is reversed. La.R.S. 44:3, listing the exceptions to the general rule that records held by public bodies are public, exempts from disclosure "[r]ecords pertaining to pending criminal litigation or any criminal litigation which can be reasonably anticipated, until such litigation has been finally adjudicated or otherwise settled." (West 1982). Post conviction relief, which the respondent argued is contemplated by relator's client, is not "criminal litigation" within the meaning of this section of the Public Records Act. The reasons for this conclusion were well stated by the court of appeal in Harrison v. Norris, 569 So.2d 585 (La.App. 2d Cir.1990). Insofar as Bizal v. Connick, 489 So.2d 343 (La.App. 4th Cir.1986) is inconsistent, it is disapproved. The respondent is ordered to produce records in its possession and not otherwise privileged.
LEMMON, J., recused.
MARCUS and COLE, JJ., dissent with reasons.
MARCUS and COLE, JJ. dissent, agreeing with the decision of Bizal v. Connick, 489 So.2d 343 (La.App. 4th Cir.1986) and the dissents in Harrison v. Norris, 569 So.2d 585 (La.App. 2d Cir.1990).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
590 So. 2d 574, 1991 WL 267831, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lemmon-v-connick-la-1991.