Legal Opinion

Clary v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided April 18, 2018No. 18–198Published

1Opinion of the Court

COOKS, Judge.

In this expedited appeal we are asked to review the trial court's ruling denying Trey Coker's Exception of No Cause of Action regarding Gene Haymon's action based on Louisiana's Antitrust Law, La.R.S. 51:122 et seq., and the trial court's ruling denying in part and granting in part an exception of no right of action raised by the trial court.

The denial of exceptions of no cause of action and no right of action are normally *11not appealable. However, La. R.S. 51:134 and 51:135 provide for an immediate appeal of such an interlocutory judgment related to antitrust claims. See…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Brown Shoe Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API