 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Revere v. Canulette5/15/1998
for making the copies of the photographs, was a violation of La.R.S. 44:1 et seq. (the Public Records Act). This action was assigned civil docket number 95-13040-D.
Request for Radio Logs
In November 1995, plaintiff requested copies of radio logs from the Sheriff's Office. On November 15, 1995, plaintiff received a response informing him that the logs were not public records. On December 18, 1995, plaintiff filed a pleading with a caption similar to the August 7, 1995 pleading, naming Patrick J. Canulette, the Sheriff of St. Tammany Parish, as defendant. In the petition, plaintiff alleged that the sheriff's failure to provide him with copies of "radio logs" was a violation of the Public Records Act. This action was assigned civil docket number 95-14940-C.
On October 31, 1995, defendant filed a supplemental answer to plaintiff's petition, claiming that it was not required to provide the radio logs to plaintiff under 1995 La. Acts No. 653, effective August 15, 1995 (codified as La.R.S. 44:31.1). Also, on October 31, 1995, defendant filed a motion to consolidate civil docket number 95-13040-D with civil docket number 94-13866-E. The motion was granted.
On July 11, 1996, defendant filed a motion to consolidate civil docket number 95-14940-C with 94-13866-E and 95-13040-D, which motion was granted on the same day. On September 23, 1996, plaintiff filed a pleading entitled "MOTION TO OBJECT TO CONSOLIDATION Ä AND OBJECTION TO IMPROPER NOTIFICATION AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE." In this pleading, plaintiff objected to the consolidation of 95-13040-D and 95-14940-C with 94-13866-E because "94-13866 was finalized and defense counsel took no appeal. That is a final judgment and the case is closed." Plaintiff also argued that he was not served with notice of the motion to consolidate and did not participate in the proceedings. Also, on September 23, 1996, plaintiff filed a "Memorandum in Support of Petition to Declare Act 653 Unconstitutional," challenging the constitutionality of La.R.S. 44:31.1.
On December 27, 1996, the trial court signed a judgment, determining that La.R.S. 44:31.1 is constitutional and dismissing plaintiff's petitions with prejudice. Plaintiff now appeals.
ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
On appeal, plaintiff asserts three assignments of error, which raise the following issues:
1. Whether La.R.S. 44:31.1, as applied in this case, is an unconstitutional violation of plaintiff's equal protection and due process rights guaranteed under the United States and Louisiana constitutions;
2. Whether the trial court erred in consolidating plaintiff's suit filed under Docket Number 94-13866, in which a final judgment had previously been rendered, with the suits filed under Docket Numbers 95-13040 and 95-14940; and
3. Whether it was error for the trial court to apply La.R.S. 44:31.1 to those suits that were filed prior to August 15, 1995, the effective date of the statute.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER ONE
Plaintiff argues that La.R.S. 44:31.1 violates Article I, Section 3 and Article XII, Section 3 of the Louisiana Constitution. He also argues that La.R.S. 44:31.1 violates his rights of access to the courts, equal protection and due process guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
Louisiana Constitution
Article I, Section 3 of the Louisiana Constitution provides, in pertinent part:
No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. No law shall discriminate against a person because of race or religious ideas, beliefs, or affiliations. No law shall arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably discriminate against a pers
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|