Franklin v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car
Franklin v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting in part.
I respectfully dissent in part. The interlocutory discovery orders are renewable with the final judgment appealed.
There is a distinction between party-initiated discovery and court-ordered discovery. Compare La. C.C.P. arts. 1469 and 1471. MTU of N. Am., Inc. v. Raven Marine, Inc., 475 So.2d 1063 (La. 1985). “Sanctions” may be ordered under the latter article, while reasonable expenses including attorney’s fees may be awarded, after a hearing, pursuant to the former. I would therefore vacate the $500 “sanction” ordered in this case. In all other respects, I would deny the writ.
Opinion of the Court
In re Franklin, Percival; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Martin, 16th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 75768; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 12-555.
Denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.