CA-0006-1211 Nonprecedential Processed

Douglas N. Zuberbier v. Acadian Ambulance Service, Inc.

Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit · Filed December 29, 2006

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

Opinion text

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

06-1211

DOUGLAS ZUBERBIER ET UX.

VERSUS

ACADIAN AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC.

************

APPEAL FROM THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. 20054878
HONORABLE KRISTIAN EARLES, DISTRICT JUDGE

************

JIMMIE C. PETERS
JUDGE

************

Court composed of John D. Saunders, Jimmie C. Peters, and Michael G. Sullivan,
Judges.

APPEAL DISMISSED; CASE TRANSFERRED.

Bob Broussard
D. Patrick Daniel, Jr.
Attorneys at Law
Post Office Drawer 80827
Lafayette, LA 70598-0827
(337) 232-3333
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS:
Douglas and Brandy Zuberbier

Mark E. Stipe
Perret Doise
Post Office Drawer 3408
Lafayette, LA 70502
(337) 262-9000
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE:
Acadian Ambulance Service, Inc.

SUMMARY DISPOSITION

PETERS, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiffs, Douglas and Brandy Zuberbier, from a

judgment granting an exception of no cause of action filed by Acadian Ambulance

Service, Inc. as to the Zuberbiers’ petition to annul a prior judgment. Acadian

Ambulance Service, Inc. has also answered the appeal, seeking damages in the form

of attorney fees.

Following judgment granting the exception, the Zuberbiers filed two motions

for new trial. Rather than disposing of the motions for new trial, the trial court simply

wrote “Denied” across the rules to show cause submitted in connection with the

motions. We have previously held that such a notation on a rule to show cause is

insufficient to constitute a judgment on a motion for new trial. See Egle v. Egle, 05-

531 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/8/06), 923 So.2d 780. Because the trial court failed to dispose

of the motions, the order of appeal was premature, and the trial court, therefore, has

not been divested of jurisdiction. See id. Accordingly, we do not have jurisdiction.

See id. Thus, we dismiss the appeal and transfer the case to the trial court for proper

disposition of the Zuberbiers’ motions. See id. We tax costs of this appeal to the

Zuberbiers.

APPEAL DISMISSED; CASE TRANSFERRED.

We dismiss the appeal and remand the case in a summary disposition in accordance with
Uniform Rules—Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-16.2(A)(1).

This opinion is NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. Uniform Rules—Courts of
Appeal, Rule 2-16.3.