Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

683 So. 2d 878

683 So.2d 878

95 La.App.5Cir. 711

Peterson v. Parish

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided October 29, 1996

Louisiana Court of Appeal · decided 1996-10-29

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1997

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1996-10-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

laGRISBAUM, Judge.

¶1In our original opinion, the notice issue was considered by this Court. The appellant’s counsel first raised the issue of whether the appellee had proven the Parish of Jefferson had notice of the defect, in accordance with La.R.S. 9:2800, in its reply brief. Rule 2-12.6 of the Uniform Rules of Courts of Appeal provides that a reply brief shall be “strictly confined to rebuttal of points urged in appellee’s brief.”

¶2While this Court is aware that Rule 1-3 of the Uniform Rules of Courts of Appeal allows an appellate court to render any judgment required by the interests of justice, we choose not to exercise such discretion in this matter.

¶3AFFIRMED ON REMAND.

/683/so2d/878 · .json · Public domain