Tappel v. Vidros
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
MANDAMUS
We grant mandamus to order a trial judge to give written reasons for his ap-pealable judgment in compliance with La.C. C.P. 1917.
The trial judge refused applicant’s request on the authority of Fontenot v. State, Dept. Hwys., La.App. 3 Cir. 1974, 300 So.2d 864 (questioned, obiter, in LaCalle v. Ashy Enterprises, La.App. 3 Cir. 1978, 353 So.2d 439, writ refused La., 355 So.2d 266).
Whether right or wrong, Fontenot and its descendants (Richard v. Richard, La.App. 1 Cir. 1978, 359 So.2d 696; Charles Ragusa & Son v. Community State Bank, La.App. 1 Cir. 1978, 360 So.2d 231) may be…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Charles Ragusa & Son v. Community State BankLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1978
- LaCalle v. Ashy EnterprisesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1978
- Richard v. RichardLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1978
- Fontenot v. STATE, DEPT. OF HIGHWAYSLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1974
- Lacalle v. Ashy EnterprisesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1978
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tappel v. VidrosLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1981