Perez v. Holt

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Perez v. Holt

633 So. 2d 866, 93 La.App. 3 Cir. 781, 1994 La. App. LEXIS 508, 1994 WL 65237

Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided March 2, 1994·No. No. 93-781·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

YELVERTON, Judge.

For the reasons discussed in the consolidated ease of Dubroc v. Allstate Insurance Co., 633 So.2d 864 (La.App. 3d Cir.1994) (93-780), we find the trial court was correct in granting Sheriff Hilton’s exception of no cause of action. However, the trial judge gave the plaintiffs no opportunity to amend. We accordingly remand to the trial court with the instruction that an order be issued to Connie Perez to amend her petition to state a cause of action against the Sheriff, if she can, within a delay deemed reasonable by the trial court.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. The plaintiff-appellant will pay the costs of her appeal.

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.

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

YELVERTON, Judge.

For the reasons discussed in the consolidated ease of Dubroc v. Allstate Insurance Co., 633 So.2d 864 (La.App. 3d Cir.1994) (93-780), we find the trial court was correct in granting Sheriff Hilton’s exception of no cause of action. However, the trial judge gave the plaintiffs no opportunity to amend. We accordingly remand to the trial court with the instruction that an order be issued to Connie Perez to amend her petition to state a cause of action against the Sheriff, if she can, within a delay deemed reasonable by the trial court.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. The plaintiff-appellant will pay the costs of her appeal.

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.

Perez v. Holt, 633 So. 2d 866, 93 La.App. 3 Cir. 781, 1994 La. App. LEXIS 508, 1994 WL 65237 (La. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

633 So. 2d 866 (Perez v. Holt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related