Case ID: so2d_605/html/1116-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LEMMON, J., HALL, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gail F. MARTIN v. SEVERN PLACE ASSOCIATES.
    No. 92-CC-1834.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 9, 1992.
   In re Severn Place Associates; State Farm Fire & Cas.; — Defendant(s); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “D”, No. 404-429; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 92-CW-0536.

Denied.

LEMMON, J.,

concurs in the denial. La. Code Civ.Pro. art. 151 contemplates the recusal of a judge who will be a witness to the facts pertinent to the merits of the case, and not the recusal of a judge whom a party desires to call at the hearing on the motion for a new trial to testify as to her behavior during the trial.

HALL, J.,

concurs. At the hearing on the motion for new trial, it may be that any relevant and material facts can be developed on the record without the judge being called as a witness. If it becomes necessary for the judge to testify, a decision the judge should make, then the judge should recuse herself from presiding over the hearing. LSA-C.C.P. Art. 151; LSA-C.E. art. 605. See State v. Wille, 595 So.2d 1149, 1154-1156 (La.1992).

DENNIS, J., joins in the concurrence by HALL, J.