Opinion

Crockerham v. Weyerhaeuser Holden Wood Products

  • 2016 La.App. 1 Cir. 0331
  • 223 So. 3d 533
  • 2017 La. App. LEXIS 1046
  • 2017 WL 2399482
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Filed
Jun 2, 2017
Status
Published
Author
Holdridge
On the bench
Guidry, Holdridge, McClendon, Pettigrew, Whipple
Cited by
5 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.6%

Overruled in part by Advanced Leveling & Concrete Solutions v. Lathan Co., 268 So. 3d 1044 (2018)

Later courts went against this

  • Overruled in part by Advanced Leveling & Concrete Solutions v. Lathan Co., 268 So. 3d 1044 (2018)

    To the extent that Crockerham and the cases cited therein purport to review portions of a judgment that is not final and appealable pursuant to the court's appellate jurisdiction, those cases are overruled.
    Louisiana Court of AppealDec 20, 20182 citing opinionsin partRead it

The opinion

HOLDRIDGE, J.,

dissenting.

Based on Duet v. Landry, 2016-0575 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/6/17) , 2017 WL 900066 and Rosewood Enterprises, Inc. v. Rosewood Development, LLC, 2016-0352 (La. App. 1 Cir. 3/6/17), 2017 WL 900041 , and the cases cited therein, the failure of the judgment in this case to state the amount of the unpaid medical bills and the amount of out-of-pocket medical expenses awarded makes the judgment indefinite and uncertain. Therefore, the judgment is not a final judgment. In accordance with prior jurisprudence of the First Circuit, for example, Costanza v. Snap-On Tools, 2013-0332 (La. App. 1 Cir. 3/5/14), 2014 WL 886021 , and Gaten v. Tangipahoa Parish School System, 2011-1133 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/23/12) , 91 So.3d 1073 , and jurisprudence of other circuits, (see States v. Greenwood Motor Lines, Inc., 2017-53 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/8/17) , 215 So.3d 287 ; Urquhart v. Spencer, 2015-1354 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/1/16) , 204 So.3d 1074, 1076 ; Green v. Lee, 2016-179 (La. App. 5 Cir. 12/7/16), 206 So.3d 425, 427 ) because the judgment in this case is not a valid final judgment, this court lacks jurisdiction to review it, and the appeal in its entirety should be dismissed. Because this court has no jurisdiction over the judgment, we have no jurisdiction to affirm part of the judgment.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.