From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Guillory v. Chapman

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Sep 24, 2010
44 So. 3d 272 (La. 2010)

Summary

reversing court of appeal and reinstating the district court's judgment, where district court correctly refused to consider a late-filed expert affidavit

Summary of this case from Madere v. Collins

Opinion

No. 10-C-1370.

September 24, 2010.

In re Chapman, Dr. Michael; Christus Health Central Louisiana D/B/A; Christus St. Frances Cabrini Hospital; Fambro, Dr. James; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court, Div. A, No. 228, 106; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 09-1005.

Prior report: La.App., 38 So.3d 573.


We reverse the court of appeal's ruling on the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and reinstate the trial court's ruling, granting the Motion for Summary Judgment. As pointed out by Judge Amy, in his dissent, the trial court considered the late timing of the affidavit filed by the plaintiff and chose to follow the mandatory language of La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(B)(2), which requires a party opposing the motion for summary judgment to serve opposing affidavits and any memorandum in support thereof "at least eight days prior to the date of the hearing unless the Rules for Louisiana District Courts provide to the contrary." Rule 9.9(b) of the Uniform Rules of the Louisiana District Courts provides, in pertinent part: "A party who opposes an exception or motion shall concurrently furnish the trial judge and serve on all other parties an opposition memorandum at least eight calendar days before the scheduled hearing." Additionally, the trial court was informed the case was six years old and the plaintiff was aware of the expert for years. As such, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the affidavit.

REVERSED; TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT REINSTATED.

JOHNSON, J., would deny the writ application.


Summaries of

Guillory v. Chapman

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Sep 24, 2010
44 So. 3d 272 (La. 2010)

reversing court of appeal and reinstating the district court's judgment, where district court correctly refused to consider a late-filed expert affidavit

Summary of this case from Madere v. Collins

reversing appellate court and holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by deciding to follow the mandatory language of La. C.C.P. art. 966(B) as to timing

Summary of this case from Cambrie Celeste LLC v. Starboard Mgmt., LLC

In Guillory v. Chapman, 10-1370 (La. 9/24/10), 44 So.3d 272, the supreme court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant a continuance when a case was six years old and the plaintiff attempted to late-file an expert affidavit.

Summary of this case from Finley v. Lakeland Partners

In Guillory, the Louisiana Supreme Court reversed an appellate court and held that "the trial court did not abuse its discretion by deciding to follow the mandatory language of La. C.C.P. art. 966(B) as to timing." Id.

Summary of this case from Brown v. Jazz Casino Co.

In Guillory v. Chapman, 10-1370 (La. 9/24/10), 44 So.3d 272, the supreme court reversed this court's ruling and reinstated the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants upon its finding of no abuse of discretion in trial court's exclusion of a late-filed expert affidavit pursuant to its decision "to follow the mandatory language of La.Code Civ.P. art. 966(B)(2)."

Summary of this case from Arceneaux v. Lafayette Gen. Med. Ctr.
Case details for

Guillory v. Chapman

Case Details

Full title:Richard J. GUILLORY, Sr. v. Dr. Michael CHAPMAN, Dr. James Fambro, and…

Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana

Date published: Sep 24, 2010

Citations

44 So. 3d 272 (La. 2010)

Citing Cases

Retailers Cas. Ins. Co. v. Insurer's Salvage Auction, Inc.

After a thorough review of the record, and of the applicable code articles, district court rules, and…

Reed v. Landry

Considering the facts of this case, we find appellant did not provide "good cause" for continuing the motion…