Williams v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. No.1 of Tangipahoa Parish

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Williams v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. No.1 of Tangipahoa Parish

258 So. 3d 584

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedDecember 17, 2018

DocketNO. 2018-C-1386

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 258 So. 3d 584 (Williams v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. No.1 of Tangipahoa Parish) 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

Williams v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. No.1 of Tangipahoa Parish, 258 So. 3d 584 (La. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Writ granted. Pursuant to La. Const. Art. V, § 5 and § 10, appeals are constitutionally guaranteed. This Court has consistently held that appeals should not be dismissed for a mere technicality. See U.S. Fire Ins. Co. v. Swann, 82-1143, (La. 11/29/82), 424 So.2d 240, 244-45 (citing *585Davidge v. Magliola, (La. 1977), 346 So.2d 177 ; Howard v. Hardware Mutual Company, 286 So.2d 334 (La.1973) ; Louisiana Power and Light Company v. Lasseigne, 255 La. 579, 232 So.2d 278 (1970) ; Favrot v. Favrot, 252 La. 192, 210 So.2d 316 (1968) ; Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. Campbell, 250 La. 868, 199 So.2d 904 (1967) ).

While a judgment denying a motion for new trial is an interlocutory order and is normally not appealable, when a motion for appeal refers by date to the judgment denying a motion for new trial, but the circumstances indicate that the appellant intended to appeal from the final judgment on the merits, the appeal should be maintained as taken from the judgment on the merits. Byrd v. Pulmonary Care Specialists, Inc. , 2016-0485 (La. App. 1 Cir. 12/22/16), 209 So.3d 192, 195.

We find the motion and order for appeal was properly taken from the only final judgment rendered in this consolidated matter, which was the dismissal of the plaintiff Earnest Williams' claims. Accordingly, we reinstate the appeal and remand to the First Circuit for further consideration.

APPEAL REINSTATED AND REMANDED TO THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

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

PER CURIAM

Writ granted. Pursuant to La. Const. Art. V, § 5 and § 10, appeals are constitutionally guaranteed. This Court has consistently held that appeals should not be dismissed for a mere technicality. See U.S. Fire Ins. Co. v. Swann, 82-1143, (La. 11/29/82), 424 So.2d 240, 244-45 (citing *585Davidge v. Magliola, (La. 1977), 346 So.2d 177 ; Howard v. Hardware Mutual Company, 286 So.2d 334 (La.1973) ; Louisiana Power and Light Company v. Lasseigne, 255 La. 579, 232 So.2d 278 (1970) ; Favrot v. Favrot, 252 La. 192, 210 So.2d 316 (1968) ; Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. Campbell, 250 La. 868, 199 So.2d 904 (1967) ).

While a judgment denying a motion for new trial is an interlocutory order and is normally not appealable, when a motion for appeal refers by date to the judgment denying a motion for new trial, but the circumstances indicate that the appellant intended to appeal from the final judgment on the merits, the appeal should be maintained as taken from the judgment on the merits. Byrd v. Pulmonary Care Specialists, Inc. , 2016-0485 (La. App. 1 Cir. 12/22/16), 209 So.3d 192, 195.

We find the motion and order for appeal was properly taken from the only final judgment rendered in this consolidated matter, which was the dismissal of the plaintiff Earnest Williams' claims. Accordingly, we reinstate the appeal and remand to the First Circuit for further consideration.

APPEAL REINSTATED AND REMANDED TO THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 So. 3d 584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-hosp-serv-dist-no1-of-tangipahoa-parish-la-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack