Hemstad v. Dakin
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Hemstad v. Dakin, 182 So. 3d 22 (La. 2015)
2015 La. LEXIS 2139; 2015 WL 5944538
Additionally, Clark, Crichton, Grant, Guidry, Reasons, Weimer
Hemstad v. Dakin
Opinion of the Court
In re M. Christakis Co., L.L.C.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 717-114 C/W 715-260; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 15-C-267.
| denied.
Concurring Opinion
additionally concurring.
hi concur in the denial of the writ. Defendants have an adequate remedy-on appeal, when the appellate courts will have fully developed record to review.
Concurring Opinion
additionally concurs and assigns reasons.
[ t While I agree that there are genuine issues of material fact, in my view, this is a very close case. In the event of an adverse judgment at trial, defendants will have an adequate remedy on appeal, at
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Cristen HEMSTAD v. Francis DAKIN and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, M. Christakis Co., L.L.C.
- Status
- Published