Summary
In Cook v. Hibernia National Bank, 2002 WL 31336987 (La. Ct. App. Mar. 15, 2002), writ denied, 817 So.2d 98 (La. 2002), the court upheld the trial court's strike of a jury request where the parties had clearly and specifically waived a jury trial in their contract, and the party opposing the waiver was an experienced businesswoman.
Summary of this case from In re Wells Fargo BankOpinion
No. 2002-C-0151.
March 15, 2002.
ON APPEAL FROM THE CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, FOR THE ORLEANS PARISH, NO. 2000-6747, HONORABLE ROBIN M. GIARRUSSO, JUDGE.
Peter J. Losavio, Jr., Ronald J. Savoie, Losavio Law Firm, Baton Rouge, Counsel for Plaintiff/Relator Debra Dean Cook, et al.
Corinne Ann Morrison, James C. Young, Heather M. Valliant, Chaffe, McCall, Phillips, Toler Sarpy, L.L.P., New Orleans, Counsel for Defendant/Respondent Hibernia National Bank.
Court composed of Judge MIRIAM G. WALTZER, Judge MICHAEL E. KIRBY and Judge DAVID S. GORBATY.
WRIT DENIED [1] Interpretation of a contract is the interpretation of the common intent of the parties. LSA-C.C. art. 2045. When the words of a contract are clear and explicit and lead to no absurd consequences, no further interpretation may be made in search of the parties' intent. LSA-C.C. art. 2046. The words of a contract must be given their generally prevailing meaning. LSA-C.C. art. 2047.
[2] Here, the contract specifically and clearly provided that jury trial was waived. Plaintiff is an experienced business woman in these documents.
The court did not err in finding the contracts clear and explicit, in refusing to consider parol evidence, and in striking the request for jury.