Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Warren v. Easter

9/23/2005

he effective date of Act 89.


We find plaintiff's claims to be without merit. The arguments raised herein were likewise raised by a similarly situated inmate in Rhone v. Ward, 39,701 (La. App. 2 Cir. 5/11/05), 902 So.2d 1258. The court in Rhone observed that the automatic stay provision does not affect any suspect class or involve any fundamental right, and is rationally related to the legitimate state interest of lessening the burdens presented by nuisance prisoner suits. The court thus found that the provision neither violates equal protection guarantees nor unconstitutionally impairs a prisoner's right of access to the courts.


We agree. We likewise agree with the Rhone court's conclusion that enforcing the stay as to those costs incurred after the effective date of Act 89 is appropriate and does not, as plaintiff suggests, constitute an unconstitutional retroactive application of the law.


CONCLUSION


For the reasons expressed, we agree with the district court ruling that the automatic stay provision of LSA-R.S. 15:1186B(2) does not violate plaintiff's constitutional rights as alleged and that the stay originally imposed should remain in effect. We thus deny plaintiff's application for supervisory review. This memorandum opinion is issued in compliance with Uniform Rules-Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-16.1.B.


WRIT DENIED.


PETTIGREW, J., DISSENTS, AND ASSIGNS REASONS.


PETTIGREW, J., Dissenting.


I respectfully dissent from the majority and would grant this writ. I am of the opinion that the practical effect of applying the automatic stay provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, LSA-R.S. 15:1186B(2), in reality, deprives a prisoner of his right of access to the courts. This application, in my humble opinion, violates a prisoner's rights as guaranteed under LSA-Const. art. I, ยง22, which provides as follows:


All courts shall be open, and every person shall have an adequate remedy by due process of law and justice, administered without denial, partiality, or unreasonable delay, for injury to him in his person, property, reputation, or other rights.






Page 1 2 

Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE