Wilson Chase Long v. Amy Lazarus

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT P.O. Box 16577

Lake Charles LA 70616

(337) 433-9403

Philip Allan LeTard Attorney at Law P. O. Box 187 Vidalia LA 71373

REHEARING ACTION: November 5, 2008

Docket Number: 08 01161-CW

WILSON CHASE LONG VERSUS AMY LAZARUS

Writ Application from Avoyelles Parish Case No. 2007-1096 H

BEFORE JUDGES:

Hon. John D. Saunders Hon. Jimmie C. Peters Hon. Marc T. Amy

As counsel of record in the captioned case, you are hereby notified that the application for rehearing filed by Amy Lazarus has this day been GRANTED (See Per Curiam)

cc: Cory Paul Roy, Counsel for the Respondent

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

08-1161

WILSON CHASE LONG VERSUS AMY LAZARUS

************

ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION FROM THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF AVOYLLES, NO. 2007-1096 H HONORABLE MARK A. JEANSONNE, DISTRICT JUDGE

************

PER CURIAM

************

Court composed of John D. Saunders, Jimmie C. Peters, and Marc T. Amy, Judges.

REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

Philip A. Letard Attorney at Law 109 Carter Street Vidalia, LA 71373 (318) 336-8990 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT:

Amy Lazarus

Cory Paul Roy Attorney at Law Post Office Box 544 Marksville, LA 71351 (318) 240-7800 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT:

Wilson Chase Long

PER CURIAM.

The applicant has filed a motion for reconsideration of this court’s denial of the relator’s supervisory writ application based on the untimely filing of the writ application. In her motion for reconsideration, the applicant alleges that certain representations were made off the record indicating that a written judgment was contemplated. See Kosmitis v. Bailey, 96-1573 (La.10/4/96), 680 So.2d 167. Because the applicant is relying on representations not of record, in the interest of justice, we remand this matter to the trial court for hearing to determine whether a written judgment was contemplated.

REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. Rule 2-16.3 Uniform Rules, Court of Appeal.