Garner v. Lizana
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Dissent · WindhorstWindhorst, J.
hi respectfully disagree with the majority, and must dissent for the reasons which follow. While many of the facts of this case present equitable difficulties and beg for a result different than that reached by the trial court, the same can be said of most cases in which the finality of peremption is at issue. Finding the jurisprudence on the applicable statutory law to be convincing, legislative intent to support sustaining the exception, and a lack of evidence of actual fraud, I concur with the dissent of Judge Liljeberg, and offer additional reasons.
LEGISLATIVE INTENT and PREROGATIVES
It is…
Also in this document: Dissent · Liljeberg.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Capo v. BlanchardLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1924
- Cole v. MurrayLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1927
- MB Industries, LLC v. CNA Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2011
- Brumfield v. McElweeLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2008
- Coffey v. BlockLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2000
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.