Ghassan Zaben v. Mohammad M. Farooqi and Talat Farooqi

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

GHASSAN ZABEN NO. 2025 CW 1229
VERSUS
MOHAMMAD M. FAROOQI AND FEBRUARY 24, 2026

TALAT FAROOQT

In Re: Ghassen Zaben, applying for supervisory writs, 19th
Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No.
702394.

BEFORE : LANIER, WOLFE, AND HESTER, JJ.

WRIT DENIED. The requirements 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.

WIL
EW

Hester, J. dissents. The trial court’s October 16, 2025
judgment, which denied Ghassan Zaben’s “Motion to Modify
Scheduling Order and Extend Discovery Deadlines” filed on
September 8, 2025, should be reversed. Although the trial court is
vested with much discretion to amend its pre-trial order, this
discretion must be exercised to prevent substantial injustice to
the parties who have relied on the pre-trial rulings and structured
the preparation and presentation of their cases accordingly.
Quality Env't Processes, Inc. v. Energy Dev. Corp., 2016-0171 (La.
App. ist Cir. 4/12/17), 218 So.3d 1045. Only upon a showing of an
abuse of a trial court's discretion to amend a pre-trial order
should the Court of Appeal intervene. Id. The trial date was
continued twice without any modification to the scheduling order,
and the case management schedule was issued after the ordered
discovery deadline. Further, since the filing of this writ
application, Mr. Faroogi has filed another motion to continue trial
and to set status conference. Thus, I find the trial court abused
its discretion in denying Ghassan Zaben’s motion to extend
discovery deadlines and would remand to the trial court to set new
deadlines.

~COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

uUTY
FOR THE COURT