Shirley Dufour v. River City Management, Inc.

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

06-1487

SHIRLEY DUFOUR
VERSUS
RIVER CITY MANAGEMENT

**********
APPEAL FROM THE
OFFICE OF WORKER’S COMPENSATION, DISTRICT 2
PARISH OF RAPIDES, NO. 05-07862
HONORABLE JAMES L. BRADDOCK, JUDGE

**********
ELIZABETH A. PICKETT
JUDGE

**********

Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, Glenn B. Gremillion, and Elizabeth A. Pickett,
Judges.

RULE TO SHOW CAUSE WITHDRAWN.

George Flournoy
Flournoy & Doggett
Post Office Box 1270
Alexandria, LA 71309
(318) 487-9858
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT:
Shirley DuFour

Debra Parker
Johnson, Stiltner & Rahman
Post Office Box 98001
Baton Rouge, LA 70808
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE:
River City Management

PICKETT, Judge.

On January 24, 2007, this court issued a rule for the plaintiff-appellant,

Shirley DuFour, to show cause, by brief only, why the instant appeal should

not be dismissed as premature. For the reasons assigned below, we withdraw

the rule to show cause.

The plaintiff filed a disputed claim for worker’s compensation against

defendant River City Management. Following a settlement, the defendant and

Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Corporation (LWCC) filed a Motion for

Penalties against the plaintiff’s attorney for failing to pay five hundred dollars

that the court previously assessed in sanctions and a penalty of three thousand

dollars to the LWCC for failure to pay a judgment. The trial court granted the

motion on August 18, 2006.

The plaintiff timely filed a motion for new trial that was denied by the

trial court on August 25, 2006, without a hearing. The plaintiff filed a notice

and intent to seek writs and the record of this appeal was lodged on November

20, 2006.

Initially, we considered that this appeal may be premature as the trial

court failed to properly dispose of the motion for new trial. The notation

"Denied" written across the rule to show cause was insufficient to constitute

a judgment on the motion. See Egle v.Egle, 05-531 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/18/06),

923 So.2d 780. At the time we issued the rule to show cause, the appeal

record before us contained no judgment rendered on the motion. However, in

response to this court’s rule, the appellant filed a motion to supplement the

appellate record with a copy of the judgment denying the motion for new trial.

We now find that this supplement to the record adequately shows that the trial

1

court disposed of the motion for new trial and this appeal is not premature.

RULE TO SHOW CAUSE WITHDRAWN.

THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION.
Rule 2-16.3 Uniform Rules, Court of Appeal.

2