Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bernard v. Duhon

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 14, 1990No. CA 89 1339Published

1DissentShortess, Judge

The majority’s opinion imposes an additional time limitation, i.e., the third party demand must be filed within 90 days of the date the incidental demand would have otherwise prescribed, to LSA-C.C.P. art. 1067. However, the third party defendant whose incidental demand is lost has no control over when he is made defendant.1 To make the availability of his incidental demands fortuitously dependent on when his opponent files the third party demand is manifestly unfair and, further, cannot be reconciled with the express language of the statute: the third party defendant has 90 days from the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Humphries v. LA. DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS, DIV. OF TRANSP.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1989
  2. WOOD ON BEHALF HAYES v. HayesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1988
  3. Patterson v. State, Dept. of Transportation & DevelopmentLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API