HERBERT FREEMAN, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ETHEL FREEMAN Vs. THE STATE OF LOUISIANA, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HOSPITALS, LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER, ET AL.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
* NO. 2007-CA-1555 * COURT OF APPEAL * FOURTH CIRCUIT * HERBERT FREEMAN, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ETHEL FREEMAN STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS * THE STATE OF LOUISIANA, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HOSPITALS, LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER, ET AL. * ******* JONES, J., DISSENTS WITH REASONS I respectfully dissent from the opinion of the majority. In deciding whether to sustain an exception of no cause of action, a district court accepts the facts alleged in the plaintiffs' petition without reference to any extraneous supporting or controverting evidence and determines whether the law affords any relief to the plaintiff if those facts are proved at trial. Bibbins v. City of New Orleans, 20021510, pp. 2-3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/21/03), 848 So.2d 686, 689-690. I believe that the Appellant, Herbert Freeman, Jr., set forth the facts necessary to state a cause of action against the Appellees. Furthermore, I find that a discussion of the applicability of the defense of sovereign immunity is not necessary at this juncture.
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.
