Elvia Solorzano-Robinson individually and on behalf of Jasmine Robinson v. PV Holding Corp.
Elvia Solorzano-Robinson individually and on behalf of Jasmine Robinson v. PV Holding Corp., No. 2025 CW 0344 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. June 5, 2025).
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc. 396 So. 2d 878
- Landis Construction Co. v. State 199 So. 3d 1
- Denoux v. Vessel Management Services, Inc. 983 So. 2d 84
Opinion text
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
ELVIA SOLORZANO-ROBINSON NO. 2025 CW 0344
INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF
OF JASMINE ROBINSON
VERSUS
PV HOLDING CORP., BUDGET
RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC.,
AVIS BUDGET CAR RENTAL, LLC,
ALBERT DICKEY, AND
PROGRESSIVE SECURITY
INSURANCE COMPANY
JUNE 05, 2025
In Re: Albert Dickey, PV Holding Corp., Avis Budget Car Rental,
LLC, Budget Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Chubb Group of
Insurance Companies and ACE Property and Casualty
Insurance Company, applying for supervisory writs, 19th
Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No.
721403.
BEFORE : PENZATO, WOLFE, MILLER, EDWARDS, AND FIELDS, JJ.
WRIT DENIED. The criteria set forth in Herlitz Construction
Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., 396 So.2d 878
(La. 1981) (per curiam), are not met.
SMM
BDE
WEF
Penzato and Wolfe, JJ., dissent. When a party raises a motion
that must be proven, it is that party’s burden to present evidence
establishing the claims made therein. Landis Const. Co. L.L.C v.
State, 2015-1167 (La. App. list Cir. 2/29/16), 199 So.3d 1, 2.
Evidence not properly and officially offered and introduced cannot
be considered, even if it is physically placed in the record.
Documents attached to memoranda do not constitute evidence and
cannot be considered. Denoux v. Vessel Mgmt. Services, Inc., 2007-
2143 (La. 5/21/08), 983 So.2d 84, 88. While documents were attached
to the memoranda, the transcript from the hearing on the motions
reflects that no evidence was properly and officially offered and
introduced at the hearing. Therefore, we would reverse the trial
court’s pre-trial rulings assigned as error in this writ as they
lacked evidentiary support.
~COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
Ana! Sf kL
ERK OF COURT