JONES v. CITY OF PINEVILLE, 2010-1373 (La. 11/5/10)

Stephan Jones v. City of Pineville.

No. 2010-C-1373.Supreme Court of Louisiana.
November 5, 2010.

Page 1

IN RE: Pineville City of; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 220, 225; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 09-1227.

On Writ of Review to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit No. 09-1227; Parish of Rapides; 9th Judicial District Court. Division C, No. 220, 225, Hon. Mary Lauve Doggett, Judge presiding.

VILAR ELLIOTT, LLC, Mark Felipe Vilar Esq., Aaron L. Green Esq.; Counsel for Applicant,

BROUSSARD, HALCOMB VIZZIER, Daniel Elmo Broussard Jr. Esq.; Counsel for Respondent.

Dear Counsel:

Enclosed please find a copy of the writ action sheet and orders issued in the above referenced matter, which are self-explanatory. The court advises that it has selected this case for possible resolution by summary disposition and per curiam opinion. After more intensive study of the merits of the case, and consideration of any oral argument, the court may adhere to its tentative decision or may assign the case for an authored opinion. Please note that pursuant to Supreme Court Rule VIII, Section 5, oral argument will be limited to fifteen minutes for each side. During argument, the court may, at its discretion, grant the parties additional time.

With kind regards, I remain,

Page 2

Granted. See Order Attached.

JPV BJJ JTK JLW GGG MRC

Page 3

In Re: City of Pineville, applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review on the docket of the 9th Judicial District Court, Rapides Parish, No. 220, 225; on the docket of the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit No. 09-1227, State of Louisiana.

And, whereas, the Court has this date, pursuant to Article 5, Section 5, of the Constitution of Louisiana, made and issued the following order, to wit —” It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the District Court and the Court of Appeal send up the record in Duplicate of the case; and that counsel for all parties be notified.”

Now, therefore, the said District Court and the Court of Appeal is hereby commanded, in the name of the State of Louisiana and of this Honorable Court, to send up forthwith to this Court, at the City of New Orleans, the record in duplicate of the above entitled case.

Witness the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana, on this 5th day of November, in the year of our Lord, Two Thousand Ten.

NOTE: FOR BRIEFING PURPOSES WRIT GRANTED November 5, 2010MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL IN CAPTIONED CASE:
Please note Section 8 of Rule VII of the Rules of this Court (as revised November 19, 1991) provides that the applicant or relator, as the case may be, must file their briefs within 25 days and the respondent within 45 days, respectively, from the date of granting of this writ.Briefs should be timely filed if oral argument is desired. Briefssubmitted on legal sized paper shoud be fastened at the top. All briefsshould be backed with the customary “Blueback” or other flexiblematerial. In criminal proceedings, the court directs that counsel must file a brief. Failure to do so may subject counsel to a penalty of contempt of Court. It is further provided in Rule VII, Section 9 that briefs sent through the mail shall be deemed timely filed if mailed on or before the due date. If the brief is received by mail on the first legal day following the expiration of the delay, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that it was timely filed. In all cases where the presumption does not apply, the timeliness of the mailing shall be shown only by an official United States postmark or by official receipt or certificate from the United States Postal Service made at the time of mailing which indicates the date thereof. Therefore, if your brief is sent by certified mail, you may want to send us a copy of your official receipt showing date of mailing.