Opinion
2023 CW 0228
04-04-2023
C.M.J v. L.M.C., WIFE OF C.M.J.
In Re: Richard Ducote, Esq., applying for supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No. 2011-13039.
BEFORE: GUIDRY, C.J., McCLENDON AND WELCH, JJ.
STAY DENIED; WRIT DENIED.
JEW
Guidry, C.J., concurs. The criteria set forth in Berlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., 396 So.2d 878 (La. 1981) (per curiam), are not met.
McClendon, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. I concur with the denial of the stay; however, I find the trial court erred in relying on La. R.S. 13:4209, which has no applicability to the instant matter/ where the trial court rendered and signed a judgment that was: vacated by this court on appeal. Generally, the decision to re-open a case for the production of additional evidence rests within the sound discretion of the trial judge; further,, there is no language in this court's prior remand order to suggest the trial court's new finding had to be based only on evidence already submitted. Accordingly, I would vacate the trial court's January 20, 2023 judgment sustaining the exception of no cause of action filed by C.M.J. and dismissing the motion to reopen the hearing filed by Richard Ducote and remand to the trial court for further consideration without reliance on La. R.:S. 13:4209.