Williams v. Rubicon, Inc.
Also decided on this docket: La., June 7, 2002 818 So. 2d 766
Williams v. Rubicon, Inc., 833 So. 2d 942 (La. 2002).
The holding in the court’s own words
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.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Cited by
- Thongsavanh v. Schexnayder 40 So. 3d 989 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
- Iles v. Ogden 37 So. 3d 427 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
- Jenkins v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 993 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
- Jenkins v. STATE EX REL. DOTD 993 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
- Edwards v. Daugherty 883 So. 2d 932 La. 2004
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Capitol House Preservation Co. v. Perryman Consultants, Inc. 818 So. 2d 766
Opinion text
833 So.2d 942 (2002) Joseph WILLIAMS v. RUBICON, INC. and Len Sanford. No. 2002-C-0802. Supreme Court of Louisiana. December 4, 2002. Rehearing Denied as Amended January 24, 2003. Maria N. Alessandra, Larry E. Demmons, New Orleans, Harry A. Johnson, III, Alan J. Robert, Phelps Dunbar, L.L.P., Gonzales, for applicant. Robert B. Macmurdo, Victor L. Marcello, Talbot, Carmouche & Marcello, Gonzales, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Upon defendant's application, we granted certiorari in this case. Williams v. Rubicon, Inc., 02-0802 (La.6/7/02), 818 So.2d 766 . 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. ON REHEARING PER CURIAM. Rehearing is granted for the sole purpose of clarifying this court's original decree. The decree of December 4, 2002 in this matter is hereby amended to read as follows: Upon defendant's application, we granted certiorari in this case. Williams v. Rubicon, Inc., 02-0802 (La.6/7/02), 818 So.2d 766 . 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 defendant's application. In all other respects, rehearing is denied.