Thomas Gorman VS Lieutenant Austin Miller, Deputy Andrew, Deputy Tom Floyd, and Deputy Robert Redmond
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT THOMAS GORMAN 2014 NO. CW 1326 VERSUS LIEUTENANT AUSTIN DEPUTY ANDREW, FLOYD, AND DECEMBER MILLER, DEPUTY DEPUTY 16, 2014 TOM ROBERT REDMOND In Thomas Re: Gorman, Judicial writs, 20th supervisory No. of East Feliciana, for applying District Parish Court, 41248 . WRIT NOT 4- 3 4- 2, 11) , 4- 5C ( 6) ( and AND JJ. HIGGINBOTHAM, Relator has failed to comply with Rules CONSIDERED. in that Appeal, GUIDRY C. J. , WHIPPLE, BEFORE: the writ Uniform Rules Courts Louisiana of application does not contain a notice the date fixed by the trial court or a copy of the judgment, and an Under date application of to return Court within had, court determine order date must be 30 this from the proper timely documentation, relator' whether set days upon Without date. return a rules, trial unable is Court this the the extended showing, these filed with this unless ruling, of a signed return date order setting intent showing the filing date, or ruling at issue. of s writ application was timely filed. Supplementation application of this the it must Rules Appeal, to seeks relator contain 2- 12 . 2, Rules with all 4- 9 and Uniform file a pertinent Uniform Rules Rules 2- 18 . 7 . new application documentation Louisiana of with and must Courts of Any new application must be filed on or before January 5, Appeal. 2015, of event Court, comply Courts an and/ or application for rehearing will not be considered. Louisiana In writ this of and must contain a copy of this ruling. VGW TMH first determine, of consideration established of a a Corporation, 599 COURT OF the prima default Inc. , dissents and is of the belief that the trial court J. , Guidry, must 616 So. 2d APPEAL, after facie So. 2d case CIRCUIT C EPUTY FOR CLERK THE Q OF COURT COURT sufficient ( La. App. on Mr. excluded Sessions 1254 ( La. FIRST hearing previously judgment. 812 a 1 & 1993) ; Cir. to Gorman' s support Fishman Rhodes 1992) . and he confirmation v. v. motion whether evidence, All Liquid Star Air Ford,
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.
