[Parents of Minor Child] v. Charlet

139 So. 3d 519, 2014 WL 2196413, 2014 La. LEXIS 1242
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in [Parents of Minor Child] v. Charlet. Read the opinion of the Court — 2014 La. LEXIS 765
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided May 23, 2014·No. No. 2013-C-2879·Published

Opinions

GUIDRY, J.,

concurs in the denial of rehearing with reasons.

| jThe privilege created by La.Code of Evid. art. 511 is for “confidential communications,” that is, communications “made privately and not intended for further disclosure by the person to a clergyman in his professional character as a spiritual adviser,” and belongs to the communicant. There is no express statutory privilege, exception to the reporting mandate, or even particular reference to communications during the Catholic Sacrament of Reconciliation or Confession. Whether or not the communication was part of a “confession per se” as that term is understood in religious doctrine, may be an ecclesiastical problem for the priest, but it does not appear to be relevant here to consideration of the meaning and intent of the Louisiana statutes involved in this case.

VICTORY, J., dissents from the denial of rehearing and would grant and docket.

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

[Parents of Minor Child] v. Charlet, 139 So. 3d 519, 2014 WL 2196413, 2014 La. LEXIS 1242 (La. 2014).

139 So. 3d 519 ([Parents of Minor Child] v. Charlet) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.