Legal Opinion

Schoenfeld v. Schoenfeld

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided January 16, 1991No. 90-CA-189, 90-CA-627Published

1Opinion

*554MOTION FOR REHEARING

The appellant alleges that the trial court erred in denying his “Motion for Rehearing.”

Plaintiff filed his motion for rehearing, in which he requested a new trial, approximately two weeks prior to the signing of the final judgment. At the hearing plaintiff sought to introduce additional evidence to show his current income and current expenses. The trial court denied plaintiffs request for a new trial, however, it allowed plaintiff to proffer the evidence.

Initially, we note that a motion for new trial filed prior to the signing of a final judgment is premature. Bordelon v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Overmier v. TraylorSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1985
  2. Bordelon v. DauzatLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1980
  3. Barker v. Rust Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1983
  4. Debetaz v. DebetazLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API