Jennifer Hulin And Edward Lamparski, Individually And On Behalf Of Their Minor Child, Noah Lamparski v. Kyle Snow, Patricia Snow, And The State Of Louisiana, Department Of Children And Family Services

Supreme Court of Louisiana
June 26, 2023
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
JENNIFER HULIN AND EDWARD
LAMPARSKI, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON
BEHALF OF THEIR MINOR CHILD, NOAH
LAMPARSKI
VS.
KYLE SNOW, PATRICIA SNOW, AND THE
STATE OF LOUISIANA, DEPARTMENT OF
CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES
No. 2023-CC-00530
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Kyle Snow - Applicant Defendant; Patricia Snow - Applicant Defendant;
Applying For Writ Of Certiorari, , 22nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 2019-
12577, Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Number(s) 2022 CW 1292;
_ _ _ _ _ _
June 26, 2023
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
Hughes, J., dissents and would deny.
JLW
SJC
JTG
WJC
JBM
PDG
06/26/2023 "See News Release 030 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 2023-CC-00530
J
ENNIFER HULIN AND EDWARD
LAMPARSKI, INDIVIDUALLYAND
ON BEHALF OF THEIR MINOR CHILD,
NOAH LAMPARSKI
VS.
KYLE SNOW, PATRICIA SNOW,
AND THE STATE OF LOUISIANA,
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN
AND FAMILY SERVICES
On Supervisory Writ to the 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany
P
ER CURIAM
The judgment of the district court precluding plaintiffs’ expert, Dr. Sarah M.
Zate, from testifying about her conclusions as to the ultimate questions of whether
defendants were negligent or credible is reinstated. See Naquin v. Hile, 536 So.2d
676, 679 (La. App. 3rd Cir. 1988) (“[a]lthough experts may aid the trial court in the
determination of ultimate facts, the final conclusions drawn from those facts belong
exclusively to the trier of fact.”).
However, the portion of the district court’s judgment precluding Dr. Zate from
offering an expert opinion testimony regarding the parental care of defendants is
vacated. Even though this testimony may embrace some of the ultimate issues to be
decided by the trier of fact, it is permissible. See La. Code Evid. art. 704; Louisiana
State Bar Assn. v. Carr & Assocs., Inc., 2008-2114 (La. App. 1 Cir. 5/8/09), 15 So.
3d 158, 170–72, writ denied, 2009-1627 (La. 10/30/09), 21 So.3d 292. The trier of
fact may accept or reject, in whole or in part, uncontradicted opinions expressed by
an expert as to ultimate facts, based upon the other evidence admitted at trial. Id. ;
In re Interdiction of DeMarco, 2009 -1791 (La. App. 1 Cir. 4/7/10), 38 So. 3d 417,
424.
06/26/23

2

DECREE
For the reasons assigned, the writ is granted. The judgment of the court of
appeal is set aside. The judgment of the district court is reinstated in part and vacated
in part. The case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent
with this opinion.