Case ID: so2d_841/html/0740-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      CALOGERO, Chief Justice,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Varnell BOYLSTON v. Bruce TIDWELL, et al.
    No. 2002-CC-2872.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 7, 2003.
   In re Tidwell, Bruce et al.; Truman Arnold Companies; Arnold, Truman Companies; St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. A, Nos. 445,157; to the Court of Appeal/Second Circuit, No. 36730-CW.

Granted. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeal for briefing, argument and a full opinion.

CALOGERO, C.J., concurs and assigns reasons.

KIMBALL and KNOLL, JJ., would deny the writ application.

CALOGERO, Chief Justice,

concurring and assigning reasons.

I concur in the court’s action. The fact that this court has reversed the court of appeal’s ruling, which denied defendant’s writ application, and directed that court to order briefing and oral argument and render a full opinion does not mean that this court intends to reverse the district court’s ruling below, nor does it mean that this court is suggesting or hinting that the court of appeal should do so on remand. Rather, this court finds that more detailed consideration of the matter pursuant to the court of appeal’s supervisory jurisdiction is warranted. See Jones v. Congemi, 02-2979 (La.1/24/03), 840 So.2d 525.