Simien v. Frazier
Simien v. Frazier, 527 So. 2d 309 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987).
Cited by
Distinguished in 1
- John C. Centanni, Jr. Versus Evablanche Mary Centanni La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2021
- Ficarra v. Ficarra 184 So. 3d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
- Trahan v. Trahan 43 So. 3d 218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
- Lanza v. Lanza 898 So. 2d 280 La. 2005
- Parry v. Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund 828 So. 2d 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
- Davis v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center 738 So. 2d 1191 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
- Madere v. Madere 632 So. 2d 1180 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
- Borrello v. Borrello 614 So. 2d 91 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
- D'Spain v. D'Spain 528 So. 2d 152 La. 1988
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- McHugh v. Chastant 503 So. 2d 791
Opinion text
WRIT GRANTED AND MADE PEREMPTORY: The trial court was incorrect in denying relators’ Motion to Compel Discovery. LSA-C.C.P. art. 1422 and McHugh v. Chastant, 503 So.2d 791 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1987). The report involved in this suit was compiled in the normal course of the hospital’s operating procedure. Given the content, nature, and purpose of the report, LSA-C.C.P. art. 1424 does not provide an exception as to this report from the general discovery rule since the report was not necessarily prepared for the sole purpose of or in anticipation of litigation as contemplated by art. 1424. IT IS ORDERED that the trial court’s judgment denying relators’ Motion to Compel Discovery is reversed and the trial court is hereby ordered to grant the relator’s motion to compel.