CACV of Colorado, LLC VS Edward Coston, III
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2006 CA 1460 CACV OF COLORADO LLC VERSUS EDWARD COSTON III Judgment Rendered September 19 2007 f Appealed from the 21st Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of St Helena Louisiana Case No 18846 The Honorable Ernest G Drake Jr D Michael Dendy Louis L Lusco II Judge Presiding Counsel for Plaintiff Appellant CACV of Colorado LLC New Orleans Louisiana Edward Coston III Independence Louisiana Defendant In Proper Appellee Person BEFORE GAIDRY MCDONALD AND MCCLENDON JJ fr 5 t4lrlm y Q CUU flui 1Z 5IJNl K0t2JrPij GAIDRY J This appeal arises from CACV to confinn a motion filed arbitration award an by CACV of Colorado L L C Edward Coston III We against and render reverse FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY CACV instituted these arbitration award pursuant proceedings by filing to La R S At any time within party one 9 4209 which confirm to an provides year after the award is made any the arbitration may apply within which the award to parish confirming motion a the to comi made was in and for the for an order the award and thereupon the court shall grant such an order unless the award is vacated modified or corrected as 4211 Notice in writing of the prescribed in R S 9 4210 and 9 application shall be served upon the adverse pmiy or his attOlney five days before the hearing thereof Emphasis added A hearing infonned the Maryland was comi to on the motion that he had taken purchase he made payments 4 000 00 held on a out at which Mr Coston 2 000 00 a computer that he saw adveliised apparently defaulted and his indebtedness Coston acknowledged receiving couldn t the a letter to bank in a television that totaling approximately was two years sold to CACV Mr Mr regarding arbitration proceedings not take any action regarding the matter because he Mr Coston did not get in touch with them by phone hearing on computer stopped working after Coston but stated that he did loan from the loan from 1999 until 2004 and that the appeared and have the award vacated modified or attempt at corrected in accordance with La R S 9 4210 and 4211 Although the trial comi followed the proper acknowledged procedure in seeking that CACV appeared to have confirmation of the award it denied the motion to confirm the arbitration award because the situation did not seem fair and dismissed the matter 2 with prejudice CACV appealed devolutively asseliing that the trial arbitration award when Mr motion and did authorized seek not comi Coston filed to vacate modify elTed in no or to refusing formal response correct confirm the to CACV the arbitration award s as by law DISCUSSION A of the simple reading conclusion that the trial The statute provides arbitration award prescribed a law or considered in R S a to the discretion court s 9 4210 and 9 4211 mean to grant provision mandatory decline to leads to the grant CACV order an s motion confirming or corrected the as Emphasis added La R S When construing word is universally the I 3 s shall The trial grant the order in this judgment dismissing CACV against Edward refusing of the statute unless the award is vacated modified constitutional to erred in that the trial comi shall award is reversed and are comi plain language motion case to court simply lacked Accordingly the trial confirm the arbitration judgment is hereby rendered in favor of CACV and Coston III in the amount of assessed to defendant Edward Coston III REVERSED AND RENDERED j 7 289 70 Costs of this appeal STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2006 CA 1460 CACV OF COLORADO LLC VERSUS EDWARD COSTON III McCLENDON J I some reluctantly concurs award Mr to reasons Mr Coston may have been entitled to question the inherent fairness of Coston did not follow the award vacated modified unable assigns Although concur relief and while I and or corrected grant him any relief this appropriate procedure See LSA R S 9 4209 arbitration to have the Thus we are
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
