July 2, 2004 - 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/2004">Court Actions</a></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 #056</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;2nd day of July, 2004, are as follows:&nbsp;BY CALOGERO, C.J.:<a href="/opinions/2004/03c3436.opn.pdf">2003-C -3436 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; CURTIS P. MEDINE, INDIVIDUALLY AND MICHAEL BUCK AS TUTOR AND LEGAL GUARDIAN OF JOHN MICHAEL KRAMER, MINOR CHILD OF JANICE BUCK MEDINE v. DR. RICHARD R. RONIGER&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Jefferson) Finding no abuse of the district court's discretion in either his admission of the expert testimony of the medical review panelists or refusal to give the plaintiffs' requested jury charges, we affirm the judgments of the district court and the court of appeal in favor of the defendant, dismissing plaintiffs' claims. AFFIRMED.KIMBALL, J., dissents for reasons assigned by Traylor, J. JOHNSON, J., dissents for reasons assigned by Traylor, J. TRAYLOR, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY JOHNSON, J.:<a href="/opinions/2004/03c1016.opn.pdf">2003-C -1016 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; LINDA BOZEMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF TOMMY BOZEMAN v. STATE OF LOUISIANA, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Caddo) In conclusion, Medicaid recipients are unable to collect the Medicaid "write-off" amounts as damages because no consideration is provided for the benefit. Thus, plaintiff's recovery is limited to what was paid by Medicaid. However, in those instances, where plaintiff's patrimony has been diminished in some way in order to obtain the collateral source benefits, then plaintiff is entitled to the benefit of the bargain, and may recover the full value of his medical services, including the "write-off" amount.VICTORY, J., concurs. KNOLL, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2004/03ka1940.opn.pdf">2003-KA-1940 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; STATE OF LOUISIANA v. EXPUNGED RECORD #249,044</a> (Parish of Rapides) In conclusion, we hold that appellee, the party challenging the constitutionality of the statute, has failed to meet his stringent burden of proving that LSA-R.S. 44:9(B)(1) does not meet a valid state purpose, under the minimal scrutiny standard of Louisiana's equal protection analysis. We conclude that retaining felony arrest records does serve a legitimate government interest, as does the statutory classification. Therefore, we find LSA-R.S. 44:9(B)(1) to be constitutional. The trial court's ruling is hereby REVERSED.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY VICTORY, J.:<a href="/opinions/2004/03c3024.opn.pdf">2003-C -3024 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; MICHAEL BONIN, ET AL. v. FERRELLGAS, INC. ET AL&nbsp;</a>.
 (Parish of Rapides) For the reasons stated herein, the judgment of the court of appeal is reversed and the judgment of the trial court is reinstated. REVERSED; TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT REINSTATED.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY WEIMER, J.:<a href="/opinions/2004/03cc3432.opn.pdf">2003-CC-3432 C/W 2003-CC-3434, 2003-CC-3435 RALEIGH LANDRY AND</a><a href="/opinions/2004/03cc3432.opn.pdf">CLAILEE AUCOIN LANDRY v. AVONDALE INDUSTRIES,INC.,&nbsp; ET AL.&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Orleans) Therefore, the decision of the court of appeal is reversed, the&nbsp; judgment of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of Reilly-Benton Company, Inc. and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is reinstated, and this case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. REVERSED; SUMMARY JUDGMENT REINSTATED; REMANDED TO DISTRICT COURT.&nbsp;&nbsp;PER CURIAM:<a href="/opinions/2004/03b2779.pc.pdf">2003-B -2779 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; IN RE: MATTHEW L. PEPPER </a>(Disciplinary Proceedings) Upon review of the findings and recommendations of the hearing committees and the disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, it is ordered that Matthew L. Pepper, Louisiana Bar Roll number 19976, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months. All but one month of the suspension shall be deferred, and respondent shall be placed on probation for a period of one year, subject to the condition that he pay restitution to Anita Allen in the amount of $600 plus legal interest. Any violation of the condition of probation, or any other 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, &sect;10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court's judgment until paid.KNOLL, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2004/03k2871.pc.pdf">2003-K -2871 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; STATE OF LOUISIANA v. MELISSA WALKER&nbsp;</a>(Parish of Caldwell) After conducting an independent review of the record, and considering the arguments of counsel, we conclude that the decision of the court of appeal does not require the exercise of our supervisory authority. Accordingly, our order of March 12, 2004 is recalled as improvidently granted.TRAYLOR, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2004/03b3195.pc.pdf">2003-B -3195 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; IN RE: MICHAEL H. O'KEEFE</a> (Disciplinary Proceedings) 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 Michael H. O'Keefe, Louisiana Bar Roll number 9951, be stricken from the roll of attorneys and that his license to practice law in the State of Louisiana be revoked based on his felony conviction as well as his activities in the runner-based solicitation matter. 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; <a href="/opinions/2004/04b0289.pc.pdf">2004-B -0289 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; IN RE: ROBERT T. DEFRANCESCH </a>(Disciplinary Proceedings) 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 Robert T. DeFrancesch, Louisiana Bar Roll number 4802, be suspended from the practice of law in Louisiana for a period of two years, with all but one year and one day deferred. This suspension shall be retroactive to February 4, 2004, the date of respondent's interim suspension. 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.WEIMER, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2004/04b0290.pc.pdf">2004-B- 0290 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; IN RE: STEPHEN R. EDWARDS</a> (Disciplinary Proceedings) 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 Stephen Randolph Edwards, Louisiana Bar Roll number 5295, 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.CALOGERO, C.J., concurs and assigns reasons. JOHNSON, J., would disbar.&nbsp;&nbsp;</div>
 </div>

</div>