Oliver v. Magnolia Clinic

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Oliver v. Magnolia Clinic

57 So. 3d 307, 2011 WL 1111739

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMarch 25, 2011

DocketNo. 2010-C-2782

StatusPublished

This text of 57 So. 3d 307 (Oliver v. Magnolia Clinic) 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

Oliver v. Magnolia Clinic, 57 So. 3d 307, 2011 WL 1111739 (La. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Vacated and remanded. La. Const. Art. V, § 8(B) provides that a “majority of the judges sitting in a case must concur to render judgment.” The court of appeal’s decree does not reflect a majority judgment on the principal issues considered in the instant case.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, the ruling of the court of appeal is vacated. It is further ordered that this matter be considered en banc so that a decree can be rendered reflecting a majority vote on each of the issues presented.

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

ORDER

Vacated and remanded. La. Const. Art. V, § 8(B) provides that a “majority of the judges sitting in a case must concur to render judgment.” The court of appeal’s decree does not reflect a majority judgment on the principal issues considered in the instant case.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, the ruling of the court of appeal is vacated. It is further ordered that this matter be considered en banc so that a decree can be rendered reflecting a majority vote on each of the issues presented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 So. 3d 307, 2011 WL 1111739, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oliver-v-magnolia-clinic-la-2011.