December 4, 2002 - Opinions - Louisiana Supreme Court

<div>
 <div class="content">
 <div class="bcrumb">
 <ol class="row breadcrumb offprint">
 <li><a href="/">Home</a></li>
 <li><a href="CourtActions/2002">Court Actions</a></li>

<li class="active">
December 4, 2002 
 </li>

</ol>

</div>
 </div>

<div id="mainbodycontent" class="col col-md-12 mainbodycontent" style="margin-top:-10px;"> 
<table cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="90%"><tbody><tr valign="top"><td valign="top" width="63%">FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE</td><td valign="top" width="37%"><div align="right">NEWS RELEASE #086</div></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td valign="top">FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA</td><td valign="top">&nbsp;</td></tr></tbody></table>&nbsp;<div style="text-align:justify;">The Opinions handed down on the&nbsp;4th day of December, 2002, are as follows:&nbsp;&nbsp;BY KIMBALL, J.:<a href="/opinions/2002/01c3180.pdf">2001-C- 3180 JOHN H. WYATT v. AVOYELLES PARISH SCHOOL BOARD&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Avoyelles)&nbsp; C/W&nbsp; 2002-C- 0131 LORRAINE SEISS v. AVOYELLES PARISH SCHOOL BOARD (Parish of Avoyelles)&nbsp; C/W&nbsp; 2002-C- 0259 PETER MARCOTTE, KEITH A. MORROW, JAMES K. BEST, WILBERT CARMOUCHE, DRUSILLA GOODY, ALBIN M. LEMOINE, JR., RICHARD MAYEAUX AND SUSAN B. ROY v. AVOYELLES PARISH SCHOOL BOARD (Parish of Avoyelles)&nbsp; For the reasons expressed herein, the judgment of the court of appeal is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded to the district court for judgment consistent with the opinion contained herein.&nbsp; AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED.Retired Judge Fred C. Sexton, assigned as Associate Justice Ad Hoc, sitting for Justice Jeannette T. Knoll, recused.&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/01c3224.pdf">2001-C- 3224 MICHAEL LAFLEUR, MANUEL CURRY AND RAYMOND KELLY, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THE CLASS OF ALL POLICE OFFICERS IDENTIFIED HEREIN v. THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Orleans)&nbsp; For the reasons expressed above, we find the lower courts erred in concluding that the city civil service rules at issue deprive plaintiffs of a vested property right. Consequently, the judgment of the court of appeal, which affirmed the trial court's judgment in favor of plaintiffs, is reversed.&nbsp; REVERSED.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY JOHNSON, J.:<a href="/opinions/2002/02c0632.pdf">2002-C- 0632 ST. BERNARD PARISH POLICE JURY AND TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY CORPORATION v. JACK DUPLESSIS&nbsp;</a>(Office Of Workers' Compensation&nbsp;District 7)&nbsp; For the aforementioned reasons, we hold that Mr. Duplessis' willful misrepresentation regarding the mileage reimbursement subjected him to the forfeiture of his workers' compensation benefits, pursuant to LSA-R.S. 23:1208. Accordingly, we reverse the decisions of the OWC and court of appeal.&nbsp; REVERSED.CALOGERO, C.J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp; WEIMER, J., concurs and assigns reasons.&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/02cc1127.pdf">2002-CC- 1127 BRANDON WILLIAMS v. THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS&nbsp;BY AND THROUGH THE PUBLIC BELT RAILROAD COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS C/W ROBERT BODENHEIMER v. NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC BELT AND CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.</a> (Parish of Orleans)&nbsp; Accordingly, we reverse the court of appeal's ruling and remand this matter to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Mr. Baxley is a "visiting attorney" who is "temporarily present in this state" for the purposes of LSA-R.S. 37:214.&nbsp; REVERSED AND REMANDED.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY VICTORY, J.:<a href="/opinions/2002/01ka0322.pdf">2001-KA- 0322 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. DONALD S. WRIGHT&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Webster)&nbsp; (First Degree Murder)&nbsp; For the reasons assigned herein and in the unpublished appendix, the defendant's conviction and sentence are affirmed. In the event this judgment becomes final on direct review when either:&nbsp; (1) the defendant fails to petition timely the United States Supreme Court for certiorari; or (2) that Court denies his petition for certiorari; and either (a) the defendant, having filed for and been denied certiorari, fails to petition the United States Supreme Court timely, under their prevailing rules, for rehearing of denial of certiorari; or (b) that Court denies his petition for rehearing, the trial judge shall, upon receiving notice from this Court under La. Code Crim. Proc. art. 923 of finality of direct appeal, and before signing the warrant of execution, as provided by La. R.S. 15:567(B), immediately notify the Louisiana Indigent Defense Assistance Board and provide the Board with reasonable time in which: (1) to enroll counsel to represent defendant in any state post-conviction proceedings, if appropriate, pursuant to its authority under La. R.S. 15:149.1; and (2) to litigate expeditiously the claims raised in that original application, if filed, in the state courts.&nbsp; AFFIRMED.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BY TRAYLOR, J.:<a href="/opinions/2002/02cj1715.pdf">2002-CJ- 1715 STATE OF LOUISIANA IN THE INTEREST OF L.B. v. G.B.B&nbsp;</a>. (Parish of Rapides)&nbsp; The judgments of the lower courts are set aside and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.&nbsp;Retired Judge Philip C. Ciaccio, assigned as Justice ad hoc, sitting for Associate Justice Jeannette T. Knoll, recused.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BY KNOLL, J.:<a href="/opinions/2002/01kk3196.pdf">2001-KK- 3196 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. ALAIRIS PAYNE&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Bossier)&nbsp; (First Degree Murder)&nbsp; For the foregoing reasons we reverse the rulings of the lower courts. Defendant's motion to suppress is hereby denied. This case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein.&nbsp; REVERSED AND REMANDED.KIMBALL, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp; WEIMER, J., concurs in the result and assigns reasons.&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/02c0831.pdf">2002-C- 0831 SS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE MINORS, LMW, BAW AND CLW v. STATE OF LOUISIANA, THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES AND EDUCATIONAL AND TREATMENT COUNCIL, INC.</a> (Parish of Calcasieu)&nbsp; For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, that found SS's action against DSS and ETC prescribed. We reinstate the judgment of the trial court which denied the peremptory exceptions of prescription of DSS and ETC, and remand this matter to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, to address the remaining issues DSS and ETC raised in their respective appeals.&nbsp; REVERSED AND REMANDED.&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/02kk1022.pdf">2002-KK- 1022 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. GWANA GREEN, ET AL.</a> (Parish of Orleans)&nbsp; Accordingly, we find the lower courts erred in failing to attribute deference to the issuing magistrate's determination of probable cause. Therefore, the rulings of the trial court and the appellate court are reversed and set aside, and the defendants' motions to suppress the evidence seized pursuant to the search warrant are hereby denied. This case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the ruling herein.&nbsp; REVERSED AND REMANDED TO THE TRIAL COURT.&nbsp;KIMBALL, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;BY WEIMER, J.:<a href="/opinions/2002/02c0556.pdf">2002-C- 0556 BOBBIE M. ROLLINS, ET AL. v. JOHNNY M. RICHARDSON, JR. ET AL.</a> (Parish of Caddo)&nbsp; The judgment of the court of appeal is reversed. Likewise, the judgment of the trial court granting partial summary judgment in favor of Allstate is reversed, and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.&nbsp;VICTORY, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp; TRAYLOR, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;PER CURIAM:&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/01b2803.pdf">2001-B- 2803 IN RE: NICHOLAS SEBASTIAN MORPHIS&nbsp;</a> (Disciplinary Proceedings)&nbsp; 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 the name of Nicholas Sebastian Morphis be stricken from the roll of attorneys and that his license to practice law in the State of Louisiana be revoked. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, &sect; 24(A), it is further ordered that respondent be permanently prohibited from being readmitted to the practice of law in this state. All costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, &sect; 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court's judgment until paid.&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/02c0802.pdf">2002-C- 0802 JOSEPH WILLIAMS v. RUBICON, INC. AND LEN SANFORD</a> (Parish of&nbsp;Ascension)&nbsp; After hearing oral arguments and reviewing the record of the matter, we conclude that the judgment below does not require the exercise of our supervisory authority. Accordingly, we recall our order of June 7, 2002 as improvidently granted, and deny plaintiff's application.&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/02b1692.pdf">2002-B- 1692 IN RE: GORDON L. HACKMAN</a> (Disciplinary Proceedings)&nbsp; Upon review of the findings and recommendation of the hearing committee and disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, it is ordered that Gordon L. Hackman be suspended from the practice of law in Louisiana for a period of thirty months. All costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, &sect; 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of the finality of this court's judgment until paid.&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2002/02b1780.pdf">2002-B- 1780 IN RE: JERRY F. PALMER</a> (Disciplinary Proceedings)&nbsp; Upon review of the findings and recommendation of the hearing committee and disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, it is ordered that the name of Jerry F. Palmer be stricken from the roll of attorneys and that his license to practice law in the State of Louisiana be revoked. All costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, &sect; 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court's judgment until paid.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</div>
 </div>

</div>