Placide J. Jumonville v. Emilie Russo Schenck, DDS

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

PLACIDE J. JUMONVILLE NO. 2019 CW 0193

VERSUS

EMILIE RUSSO SCHENCK, DDS JUL 3 0 2019

In Re: Emilie Russo Schenck, DDS, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St.

Tammany, No. 201714891.

BEFORE: McDONALD, McCLENDON, and CRAIN, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The trial court' s January 28, 2019 judgment

denying the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant, Dr. Emilie Russo Schenck, is reversed. We find the trial court

erred in failing to exclude the exhibits that plaintiff, Placide Jumonville, attached to his opposition and to his sur -reply to the defendant' s motion for summary judgment, which were

inadmissible because they were either not on the exclusive list of documents provided in Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 966( A)( 4) and/ or were not properly authenticated or

certified. See Raborn v. Albea, 2016- 1468 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 5/ 11/ 17), 221 So. 3d 104, 111- 12. Therefore, the plaintiff

failed to produce factual support sufficient to establish that he would be able to satisfy his evidentiary burden of proof at

trial. Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant, Dr. Emilie Russo Schenck, is granted, and plaintiff' s

claims against defendant, Dr. Emilie Russo Schenck, are

dismissed with prejudice.

JMM

WJC

McClendon, J., concurs, but would have granted the parties

oral argument.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

s

1

DEPUTY CL"E K OF COURT FOR THE COURT