Cases

ORDER AND REASONS NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN, District Judge. This case is about whether a school system unconstitutionally and tortiously adjudicated allegations that one of its students misbehaved during a field trip. Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment1 filed by Defendants St. Tammany *839Paris

611 F.Supp.2d 608 (2009) Maria PICARD v. ST. TAMMANY PARISH HOSPITAL. Civil Action No. 08-824. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. April 7, 2009. *610 Edward Sebastian Rapier, Jr., Edward S. Rapier, Attorney at Law, Covington, LA, for Maria Picard. Charles H. Hollis, Allison Nicole Seale, Vasilios Manthos, The Ku

377 F.Supp.2d 595 (2005) Michael NIGRO v. ST. TAMMANY PARISH HOSPITAL, et al. No. CIV.A. 04-1483. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. June 6, 2005. *596 *597 *598 Jill Leininger Craft, Jill L. Craft, Attorney at Law, Baton Rouge, LA, Angela Wilt C

(2008) Toni S. LEMLY v. ST. TAMMANY PARISH HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 1 d/b/a St. Tammany Parish Hospital. Civil Action No. 07-529. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. July 30, 2008. ORDER AND REASONS SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge. Before the Court is defendant's motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, the Court G

Case: 20-30644 Document: 00516080088 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/03/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 3, 2021

CHUTZ, J. Claimaint-appellant, Jerry Neal, Jr.,1 appeals the judgment of the Office of Workers' Compensation (OWC), dismissing his claims for indemnity benefits against his former employer, St. Tammany Parish Hospital (STPH). We affirm. *161BACKGROUND The parties s

CHUTZ, J. Claimaint-appellant, Jerry Neal, Jr.,1 appeals the judgment of the Office of Workers' Compensation (OWC), dismissing his claims for indemnity benefits against his former employer, St. Tammany Parish Hospital (STPH). We affirm. *161BACKGROUND The parties s

CHUTZ, J. Plaintiff-appellant, Eric Lowe, appeals the trial court's judgment denying him attorney fees subsequent to his request for withheld and redacted documents by defendants-appellees, the Parish of St. Tammany, its president, Patricia P. Brister, and its Director of Planning and Development, Sidney Fontenot (collectively "the Parish"). We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

THERIOT, J. 12This is a companion case to Stevens v. St. Tammany Parish Government, 16-0197 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1/18/17), 212 So.3d 562, handed down this same date. The plaintiffs-appellants, Terri Lewis Stevens and Jennifer Fruchtnicht, wife ofiand Craig Rivera (collectively “the petitioners”), appeal a judgment of the trial court in favor of the defendant-appellee, St. Tammany Parish Government (“STPG”), finding Ms. Stevens a

THERIOT,,J. |2This is a companion case to Stevens v. St. Tammany Parish Government, 16-0534 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1/18/17), 212 So.3d 568, handed down this same date. The plaintiffs-appellants, Terri Lewis Stevens and Jennifer Fruchtnicht, wife ofland Craig Rivera (collectively “the petitioners”), appeal a judgment entered by the trial court in favor of the defendant-appel-lee, St. Tammany Parish Government (“STPG”), denying the pe

McClendon, J. lain this workers’ compensation case, the employer appeals from a judgment that awarded the claimant penalties and attorney fees. The claimant answered the appeal, seeking additional attorney fees for defending the appeal. For the following reasons, we reverse that part of the judgment that awarded penalties and attorney fees and deny the answer to the appeal. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HIST

GUIDRY, J. ^Plaintiff, Sheryl Mederos, appeals from a trial court judgment granting summary judgment in favor of defendants, St. Tammany Parish Government, Patricia Brister, Beverly Gariepy, and Leslie Montgomery, and dismissing her claims against them with prejudice. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY St. Tammany Parish Government (Parish) hired Mederos in

GUIDRY, J., would grant and assigns reasons. | «This matter involves the enforcement of local zoning ordinances, which are fundamental to our system of self-governance and of great importance to the citizenry. For this reason alone, this case warrants • thorough consideration by the Supreme Court of Louisiana. It is not a typical preemption case, in my. view, because St. Tammany Parish is not attempting

McCLENDON, J. In this mandamus action, the defendant appeals the trial court judgment that granted, in part, the plaintiff's requests for public records and awarded the plaintiff attorney fees and costs. The plaintiff answered the appeal seeking a modification of the judgment, alleging that the trial court failed to order the production of all documents as requested, failed to award damages and penalties, and erred in its calculatio

McCLENDON, J. In this mandamus action, the defendant appeals the trial court judgment that granted, in part, the plaintiff's requests for public records and awarded the plaintiff attorney fees and costs. The plaintiff answered the appeal seeking a modification of the judgment, alleging that the trial court failed to order the production of all documents as requested, failed to award damages and penalties, and erred in its calculatio

KNOLL, J., would grant and assigns reasons. 11 Although we normally do not assign reasons in writ denials, I find this case merits assigning reasons why I would grant both writs. These writs present important, difficult, and challenging issues that this Court should address. The St. Tammany Parish government and the Commissioner of the Office, of-Conservation both rely on constitutional grants of author

CHUTZ, J. | aPlaintiff-appellant, St. Tammany Parish Government (the Parish), and interve-nor-appellant, Concerned Citizens of St. Tammany (CCST), appeal the trial court’s summary judgment: (1) in favor of Helis Oil <& Gas Company, LLC (Helis Oil), declaring St. Tammany Parish’s zoning ordinances, which prohibited or interfered with the drilling of a well by intervenor-appel-lee, Helis Oil, pursuant to a drilling permit i

PER CURIAM: * Plaintiff Cynthia DeBlanc (“DeBlanc”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to St. Tammany Parish School Board (“St. Tammany”) on her Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) discrimination and retaliation claims. The *310district court (1) declined to grant DeBlanc a continuance under Federal Rule of Civil Pr

McCLENDON, J., dissenting. |tI disagree with the majority that a writ of mandamus is appropriate in this ease. This is not “a simple, definite fix of an undisputed ministerial error in mapping.” To the contrary, the map that was drawn in error was subsequently adopted as part of an ordinance of the Parish Council.1 As such, any change to the parish zoning map is a zoning change and a modi

HIGGINBOTHAM, J. | ^Plaintiff challenges the trial court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing his suit against the City of Mandeville. The issue presented is whether plaintiffs claims are barred by a Louisiana recreational use immunity statute, La. R.S. 9:2795. Finding that plaintiffs claims are barred, we affirm. BACKGROUND According to the record, John V. Souza, III (“plaintiff’) was