From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lout v. Bootsy's Deli

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit
Sep 26, 2003
868 So. 2d 26 (La. Ct. App. 2003)

Summary

In Lout, the appellant failed to timely file a brief, the clerk's office issued a notice of abandonment (NOA), a brief was submitted prior to the NOA deadline, but was not filed and was returned as non-compliant, and, accordingly, the appeal was dismissed; appellant then filed an application for rehearing that was granted, and the appeal was reinstated.

Summary of this case from Hehn v. Hehn

Opinion

No. 2002 CA 2703.

September 26, 2003.

ON APPEAL FROM THE OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATION, DISTRICT 6, NUMBER 01-03045 STATE OF LOUISIANA HONORABLE ROBERT W. VARNADO. JR. WORKERS' COMPENSATION JUDGE.

DANIEL E. BECNEL, III, LAPLACE, LA, COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT REBECCA J. LOUT.

JEFFREY C. NAPOLITANO, BRADLEY P. NACCARI, METAIRIE, LA. COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE BOOTSY'S DELI (SEDCO INC.).

BEFORE: WHIPPLE, KUHN, AND McDONALD


The appellate record indicates that the appellant timely filed an appeal in this matter on October 16, 2002. The briefing schedule in conformity with Rule 2-12.7 provided that appellant's brief was due on January 21, 2003. Appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file her brief and was given until February 5, 2003, to do so. On that date, the appellant filed a second request for an extension of time to file her brief and was given until February 20, 2003, to do so. However, appellant failed to file her brief. On February 27, 2003, a letter was sent to appellant from the clerk of this court advising her that she had until March 29, 2003, to file her brief or her appeal would be dismissed.

Appellant suggests that she mailed her brief on March 28, 2003, but failed to include a copy of the judgment from the workers' compensation judge. Uniform Rules-Courts of Appeal 2-12.4 requires that the judgment "shall be appended to the brief of the complaining litigant on appeal." Upon learning of this, the judgment was sent. However, appellant does not dispute that the brief that included the attached judgment was filed three days late, or than an order of dismissal was issued on April 7, 2003.

Subsequent to this dismissal, plaintiff filed an application for rehearing and a motion to reinstate the appeal. The motion was granted by this court and the appeal was reinstated, for purposes of argument, on May 16, 2003. On May 30, 2003, defendant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, contending that the matter had become final when appellant failed to file the brief and the order of dismissal issued. We agree.

Appellant has failed to meet any of the deadlines set by this court. The appeal is dismissed. Appellee's timely filed answer is dismissed as moot. Costs are assessed against the appellant.

APPEAL DISMISSED.


We do not reach the merits of this dispute because appellant did not timely file her appellate brief. However, if we were to address the merits, I would find no error in the ruling of the Office of Workers' Compensation.


Summaries of

Lout v. Bootsy's Deli

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit
Sep 26, 2003
868 So. 2d 26 (La. Ct. App. 2003)

In Lout, the appellant failed to timely file a brief, the clerk's office issued a notice of abandonment (NOA), a brief was submitted prior to the NOA deadline, but was not filed and was returned as non-compliant, and, accordingly, the appeal was dismissed; appellant then filed an application for rehearing that was granted, and the appeal was reinstated.

Summary of this case from Hehn v. Hehn
Case details for

Lout v. Bootsy's Deli

Case Details

Full title:REBECCA J. LOUT v. BOOTSY'S DELI (SEDCO, INC.)

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit

Date published: Sep 26, 2003

Citations

868 So. 2d 26 (La. Ct. App. 2003)

Citing Cases

Hehn v. Hehn

GUIDRY, J., concurring. Although I agree with the majority's decision to grant the application for rehearing…