|FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE
|FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
The Opinions handed down on the 10th day of December, 2013, are as follows:
BY VICTORY, J.:
2013-C -0691 BENJAMIN G. FIDELAK AND KERI TUBRE FIDELAK v. HOLMES EUROPEAN MOTORS, L.L.C. D/B/A LAND ROVER SHREVEPORT, ET AL. (Parish of Caddo)
For the reasons stated herein, the judgments of the lower courts are reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED AND REMANDED
2013-O -2055 IN RE: RAYMOND THOMAS, JR. JUSTICE OF THE PEACE CANDIDATE WARD 1, ASSUMPTION PARISH STATE OF LOUISIANA
Accordingly, it is ordered that Mr. Thomas pay a civil penalty to the State of Louisiana, Judicial Branch, in the amount of $200.00, plus costs in the amount of $401.00, no later than thirty days from the finality of this judgment.
BY KNOLL, J.:
2013-C -0397 BARBARA SHAW v. ACADIAN BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS, LLC (Parish of Ascension)
Judge Robert Klees was assigned as Justice ad hoc, sitting for Hughes, J., recused.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Court of Appeal is hereby reversed and the trial court judgment is reinstated in its entirety.
REVERSED AND RENDERED.
GUIDRY, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
BY WEIMER, J.:
2013-C -1085 MARY P. OGEA v. TRAVIS MERRITT AND MERRITT CONSTRUCTION, LLC (Parish of Calcasieu)
The judgment of the court of appeal is reversed insofar as it finds the individual member of the LLC personally liable. Judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the individual member of the LLC dismissing all claims against him. In all other respects, the judgment of the court of appeal is affirmed.
REVERSED IN PART; JUDGMENT RENDERED.
JOHNSON, C.J., concurs in result.
GUIDRY, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
CLARK, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
BY CLARK, J.:
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. GLEN P. DRAUGHTER (Parish of Orleans)
After reviewing the statue under a strict scrutiny analysis, we hold La. R.S. 14:95.1, as applied to a convicted felon still under state supervision, does not unconstitutionally infringe upon the right to bear arms secured by article I, section 11 of the Louisiana Constitution. The district court’s ruling that La. R.S. 14:95.1 is unconstitutional is reversed. The district court's ruling granting the defendant's motion to quash the bill of information is reversed. This matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
BY HUGHES, J.:
2013-C -0579 CLYDE SNIDER, JR., ET UX v. LOUISIANA MEDICAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. (Parish of Beauregard)
For the reasons assigned herein, we reverse the appellate court's judgment and remand this matter to the appellate court for disposition of the plaintiffs' assignments of error in accordance with this opinion.
REVERSED; REMANDED TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT.
JOHNSON, C.J., concurs in result.
KNOLL, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
2012-K -2358 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. BRANDON SMITH (Parish of Orleans)
The decision of the court of appeal is therefore reversed and defendant's conviction and sentence are reinstated.
JOHNSON, C.J., dissents and assigns reasons.
2012-K -2677 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. JASON T. DUHE (Parish of St. Tammany)
The trial court therefore properly denied defendant's motion to suppress. The decision of the court of appeal is therefore reversed and defendant's conviction and sentence are reinstated.
2013-B -2023 IN RE: THOMAS ROBERT SCHMIDT
Upon review of the findings and recommendations of the hearing committee and disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, it is ordered that Thomas Robert Schmidt, Louisiana Bar Roll number 26503, be and he hereby is suspended from the practice of law for one year and one day. It is further ordered that all but sixty days of the suspension shall be deferred. Following the active portion of the suspension, respondent shall be placed on supervised probation for a period of two years. As conditions of probation, respondent is ordered to attend and successfully complete the Louisiana State Bar Association’s Ethics School, and resolve any fee dispute that remains in the Bartholomew and Ball matters. The probationary period shall commence from the date respondent, the ODC, and the probation monitor execute a formal probation plan. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred portion of the suspension executory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate. All costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court’s judgment until paid.