From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Henry v. Sullivan

Supreme Court of Louisiana.
Nov 18, 2016
206 So. 3d 858 (La. 2016)

Opinion

NO. 2016–CJ–1867

11-18-2016

David HENRY v. Janice SULLIVAN


PER CURIAM

The plain language of La. R.S. 13:4209(B)(2) provides, "[i]f a prior judge has stated an affirmative intent to sign a judgment and failed to do so for whatever reason , the successor judge is empowered to sign the judgment." [emphasis added]. In the instant case, Judge Amacker, through her oral reasons, clearly manifested an affirmative intent to sign a judgment in favor of relator. Therefore, Judge Devereux, in her capacity as successor judge, is empowered to sign the judgment. Any other result would be contrary to the statutory intent as well as the interests of judicial economy.

Accordingly, the writ is granted. The judgment of the court of appeal is vacated and set aside. The district court's February 12, 2016 judgment is reinstated, and the case is remanded to the court of appeal for consideration of the appeal on the merits.

CRICHTON, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.

CRICHTON, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.

I additionally concur for the reasons I expressed in my concurrence in Donahue v. Donahue , 2016–CJ–1853.


Summaries of

Henry v. Sullivan

Supreme Court of Louisiana.
Nov 18, 2016
206 So. 3d 858 (La. 2016)
Case details for

Henry v. Sullivan

Case Details

Full title:David HENRY v. Janice SULLIVAN

Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Date published: Nov 18, 2016

Citations

206 So. 3d 858 (La. 2016)

Citing Cases

Fabre v. Manton

However, because Judge Coady clearly manifested through his written reasons an affirmative intent to sign a…

Benoit v. Benoit

We find no merit to this argument. This issue has already been addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court in…