Mire v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1ConcurrenceHood, Judge
I disagree with the conclusion reached by my colleagues. I nevertheless am concurring in the majority opinion for two reasons: (1) My refusal to concur would cause the case to be reargued, entailing additional delays and expense to the parties, and eventually the same result would be reached; and (2) the majority recognizes that after the case is remanded, a motion for summary judgment may be filed presenting the same issue which is before us now, and in that manner the parties eventually will be able to have that issue determined.
The sole question presented on this appeal is whether an…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- American Creosote Company v. SpringerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1970
- Parks v. Winnfield Life Insurance CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1976
- Rheuark v. Terminal Mud & Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1948
- Honeycutt v. Town of BoyceLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1976
- North Central Utilities, Inc. v. SarverLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1975
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.