Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Smart Summary

Case Summary: DARRYL L. BROWN v. EBASCO SERVICES, INC., et al.

Factual and Procedural Background

Darryl L. Brown applied for a writ of certiorari and/or review to the Supreme Court of Louisiana from the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit (No. 84-CA-133), arising from proceedings in the 29th Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Charles, Div. "C", No. 25,806. The Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion on February 8, 1985. An editors' note references a majority opinion at 462 So.2d 1235. The lower courts had dismissed the action against Louisiana Power and Light Company and against Ebasco Services, Inc., and the Supreme Court considered those dismissals.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether Louisiana Power and Light Company was a "principal" within the meaning of La.R.S. 23:1032.
  2. Whether the petition alleged facts sufficient to state a cause of action against Louisiana Power and Light Company under La.C.C.P. Art. 927.
  3. Whether the lower courts' dismissal of the action against Ebasco Services, Inc. should be disturbed.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court observed that it was doubtful Louisiana Power and Light Company was a principal under La.R.S. 23:1032. Acting on its own motion, the court determined that it could notice a petition's failure to state a cause of action under La.C.C.P. Art. 927 and concluded that the factual allegations in the petition did not state a cause of action against Louisiana Power and Light Company. Although the court denied the application insofar as the lower courts had dismissed the action against Louisiana Power and Light Company on the ground that the petition failed to state a cause of action, the court nonetheless granted the application in part and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to permit the plaintiff to amend his petition as to Louisiana Power and Light Company pursuant to La.C.C.P. Art. 934. As to Ebasco Services, Inc., the court denied the application concerning the dismissals by the lower courts.

Holding and Implications

Application granted in part and denied in part; remanded to permit amendment as to Louisiana Power and Light Company; application denied as to Ebasco Services, Inc.

Consequences: The Supreme Court concluded the petition, as pleaded, failed to state a cause of action against Louisiana Power and Light Company but directed that the plaintiff be permitted to amend the petition in district court. The application was denied with respect to Ebasco Services, Inc., leaving the lower-court dismissal as to Ebasco intact. The opinion does not announce any broader new legal principle.

DARRYL L. BROWN v. EBASCO SERVICES, INC., TOMPKINS-BECKWITH, INC., LOUIS JOSEPH, HILLARY JONES, ABC INSURANCE COMPANY, XYZ INSURANCE COMPANY AND LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT CO.

[EDITORS' NOTE: MAJORITY OPINION CAN BE FOUND AT 462 So.2d 1235.]

Granted in part. See order. Otherwise, denied.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.

[5] PER CURIAM.

It is doubtful that Louisiana Power and Light Company was a principal under La.R.S. 23:1032. Nevertheless, this court on its own motion can notice that a petition fails to state a cause of action, and the factual allegations of this petition do not state a cause of action against Louisiana Power and Light Company. La.C.C.P. Art. 927.

Accordingly, insofar as the judgments of the lower courts dismissed the action against Louisiana Power and Light Company, the application is denied on the basis that the petition fails to state a cause of action against Louisiana Power and Light Company; however, the application is granted in part, and the case is remanded to the district court with instructions to permit plaintiff to amend his petition as to Louisiana Power and Light Company. La.C.C.P. Art. 934.

Insofar as the judgments of the lower courts dismissed the action against Ebasco Services, Inc., the application is denied.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BROWN v. EBASCO SERVICES, INC
(Feb 8, 1985)