You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Vermilion Parish Police Jury v. Doe

Citations: 151 So. 3d 590; 2014 La. LEXIS 2284; 2014 WL 5818026Docket: No. 2014-CC-2125

Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana; October 24, 2014; Louisiana; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The application for supervisory and/or remedial writs filed in the case of In re Broussard and Romero before the 15th Judicial District Court in Vermilion, docket number 92228, was not considered due to being untimely. Although Columbus Day is recognized as a legal holiday under Louisiana law (La. R.S. 1:55(A)(1)), it is not included among the holidays specified for time delay calculations under La. R.S. 1:55(E)(3) in accordance with La. Code Civ. P. art. 5059. This interpretation is supported by the precedent set in Hooper v. Wisteria Lakes Subdivision. Justice Hughes dissented, expressing a willingness to consider the matter on its merits.

Legal Issues Addressed

Judicial Dissent

Application: Despite the majority's decision, Justice Hughes dissented, indicating an openness to reviewing the case based on its substantive issues.

Reasoning: Justice Hughes dissented, expressing a willingness to consider the matter on its merits.

Legal Holidays and Time Delay Calculations

Application: The court clarified that Columbus Day, while a recognized legal holiday in Louisiana, does not affect the calculation of time delays for filing writ applications.

Reasoning: Although Columbus Day is recognized as a legal holiday under Louisiana law (La. R.S. 1:55(A)(1)), it is not included among the holidays specified for time delay calculations under La. R.S. 1:55(E)(3) in accordance with La. Code Civ. P. art. 5059.

Precedent in Time Delay Interpretation

Application: The court relied on the precedent set in a previous case to interpret the application of holidays in time delay calculations.

Reasoning: This interpretation is supported by the precedent set in Hooper v. Wisteria Lakes Subdivision.

Timeliness of Writ Applications

Application: The application for supervisory and/or remedial writs was not considered because it was filed after the deadline, demonstrating the strict adherence to procedural timelines.

Reasoning: The application for supervisory and/or remedial writs filed in the case of In re Broussard and Romero before the 15th Judicial District Court in Vermilion, docket number 92228, was not considered due to being untimely.