May 21, 2008 - 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/2008">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 #036</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;The Opinions handed down on the&nbsp;21st day of May, 2008, are as follows:&nbsp;BY CALOGERO, C.J.:<a href="/opinions/2008/07CA2432.opn.pdf">2007-CA-2432 MELVIN J. BURMASTER v. PLAQUEMINES PARISH GOVERNMENT</a>&nbsp;(Parish of Plaquemines) The district court correctly found that La. Rev. Stat. 9:2800(H), adopted by 2006 La. Act 545, applies to the causes of action under La. Civ. Code arts. 2317 and 2317.1 asserted in this case. The district court also correctly found that La. Rev. Stat. 9:2800(H), adopted by 2006 La. Act 545, is unconstitutional if made applicable to the pending, accrued, vested causes of action asserted by plaintiff and the class he represents. Accordingly, we affirm the district court judgment denying the PPG's exception of no cause of action. The case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings.DENIAL OF EXCEPTION OF NO CAUSE OF ACTION AFFIRMED; CASE REMANDED.VICTORY, J., dissents and assigns reasons. TRAYLOR, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY KIMBALL, J.:<a href="/opinions/2008/07C1907CW07C1908.opn.pdf">2007-C -1907 C/W 2007-C -1908 MARK LANDRY AND BARBARA LANDRY v. LOUISIANA CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE COMPANY</a>&nbsp;(Parish of Vermilion) The court of appeal's judgment reversing the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. That portion of the court of appeal's judgment purporting to interpret and apply the valuation provisions of La. R.S. 22:695 in this case is vacated. The case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED IN PART; AND REMANDED.CALOGERO, C.J., concurs. VICTORY, J., concurs.&nbsp;<a href="/opinions/2008/07KA2285.opn.pdf">2007-KA-2285 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. ALEXANDER GRANGER</a>&nbsp;(Parish of E. Baton Rouge) For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the district court declaring La. R.S. 15:578.1 unconstitutional is reversed.REVERSED.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY JOHNSON, J.:<a href="/opinions/2008/07C2143.opn.pdf">2007-C -2143 ANDRE' J. DENOUX, KURT LABEAUD, THERON J. WASHINGTON, DAVID DICKERSON, ROBERT P. WILLIAMS, JR., RICHARD W. BLACKMAN, CHRISTOPHER R. BOOKER, HORACE BLANKS, III, DERRICK A. MATTHEWS, ROBERT TAYLOR, CHRISTOPHER G. HAINES AND LORENZO N. MORGAN v. VESSEL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., BELLE OF ORLEANS, LLC, BALLY'S LOUISIANA, INC., D/B/A BALLY'S CASINO LAKESHORE RESORT, INC. AND PATRICK M. BROWNING</a>&nbsp;(Parish of Orleans) For the foregoing reasons, we affirm that portion of the court of appeal's judgment affirming the judgment of the trial court which sustained the exception of prescription by Glidden Company, d/b/a ICI Paints. We vacate the portions of the court of appeal's judgment finding that Plaintiffs are not Jones Act seaman, that the Belle of Orleans was not a vessel in navigation, and that none of the Plaintiffs' claims fall within the admiralty jurisdiction.AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART.CALOGERO, C.J., concurs and assigns reasons. JOHNSON, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons. VICTORY, J., concurs. WEIMER, J., concurs.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY VICTORY, J.:<a href="/opinions/2008/08CC0060.opn.pdf">2008-CC-0060 TARA LABOVE HEBERT, ET AL. VERSUS SCOTTY L. WEBRE, ET AL. C/W FLETCHER GABRIEL LALANDE, ET UX. v. SCOTTY L. WEBRE, ET AL.</a>&nbsp;(Parish of Cameron) For the reasons stated herein, the judgment of the court of appeal is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court to grant State Farm's Motion for Summary Judgment and for further proceedings.REVERSED AND REMANDED.JOHNSON, J., concurs.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY TRAYLOR, J.:<a href="/opinions/2008/06KA0286.opn.pdf">2006-KA-0286 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. LADERRICK CAMPBELL</a>&nbsp;(Parish of Caddo) For the reasons assigned herein, the defendant's conviction and sentence are affirmed. In the event this judgment becomes final on direct review when either: (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.C.Cr.P. 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.AFFIRMED.CALOGERO, C.J., dissents and assigns reasons. JOHNSON, J., dissents and assigns reasons.&nbsp;&nbsp;BY WEIMER, J.:<a href="/opinions/2008/07C2110.opn.pdf">2007-C -2110 LARRY AND ROSIE ADAMS v. RHODIA, INC. AND EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION</a>&nbsp;(Parish of E. Baton Rouge) For the foregoing reasons, we find the court of appeal erred in finding the jury instruction misled the jury and in conducting a de novo review of the record. Following a manifest error review, we cannot say the jury erred in its determination that Exxon was 10% at fault for Adams' injuries and damages. We reverse the court of appeal decision and reinstate the jury verdict.REVERSED; JURY VERDICT REINSTATED.VICTORY, J., dissents with reasons. TRAYLOR, J., dissents for reasons assigned by Victory, J.&nbsp;&nbsp;
 </div>

</div>