Prejean v. Real Superstore
Prejean v. Real Superstore, 525 So. 2d 75 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988).
Cited by
- Margeaux Fairley v. Jared Mertens Poche, Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. and Smg La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
- Gorvine v. Travelers Insurance Companies 724 So. 2d 248 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
- Succession of Pauli 688 So. 2d 98 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
- Savoy v. University Medical Center 676 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
- Trosclair v. Cohen 576 So. 2d 1230 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
- Zeno v. Smith 541 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
- Matter of Hornsby and Landry 532 So. 2d 559 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Lyman v. Town of Sunset 453 So. 2d 672
- Roy v. Moity 225 So. 2d 315
- Keaty v. Furlow, Inc. 449 So. 2d 499
Opinion text
MOTION TO DISMISS FORET, Judge. Defendant-appellee, National Tea Company, moves to dismiss the appeal of plaintiff-appellant, Elsie Prejean, on the grounds that the judgment appealed from is a non-appealable interlocutory judgment. The trial court rendered judgment against the plaintiff compelling her to answer the interrogatories propounded to her by defendant within fifteen (15) days and assessing her with attorney’s fees in the sum of $150 for the cost to defendant in bringing the Motion to Compel. As this court stated in Lyman v. Town of Sunset, 453 So.2d 672 (La.App. 3 Cir.1984): “An appeal may be taken from a final judgment or interlocutory judgment which may cause irreparable injury. LSA-C.C.P. Article 2083. A final judgment is one that determines the merits in whole or in part. A judgment that only determines preliminary matters in the course of an action is an interlocutory judgment.” LSA-C.C.P. Article 1841. “Discovery orders such as those that assess attorney’s fees for failure to comply with discovery as required by statute, are considered to be interlocutory orders that are non-appealable and do not cause irreparable harm.” Roy v. Moity, 225 So.2d 315 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1969); Keaty v. Furlow, Inc., 449 So.2d 499 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1984). We, therefore, conclude that the judgment rendered is an interlocutory judgment and that there has been no showing of irreparable injury. The plaintiff-appellant may obtain appellate review upon an appeal from the merits of the case. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal at plaintiff-appellant’s cost. APPEAL DISMISSED.