Venable v. Smith
529 So. 2d 888, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 1806, 1988 WL 87852
Opinion
WRIT DENIED: There is no error in the ruling complained of. An in camera inspection by the trial court to determine whether or not an attorney’s file contains discoverable material is not a violation of C.C.P. art. 1422 et seq. Also, see McHugh v. Chastant, 503 So.2d 791 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1987).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Venable v. Smith, 529 So. 2d 888, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 1806, 1988 WL 87852 (La. Ct. App. 1988).
529 So. 2d 888 (Venable v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal Dist. v. Violet Dock Port, Inc.
246 So. 3d 23 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018)