Court Opinion

ID: 9804232
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 16:34:06.66567+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:05:02.281031
License: Public Domain

GUIDRY, Justice,
dissents and assigns reasons.
hi respectfully dissent from the majority opinion today because this case is not in the proper posture for this court’s review. The attorney general was neither served nor notified of the plaintiffs challenge attacking the constitutionality of La.Rev. Stat. 15:571.3, amended by Acts 2006, No. 572, as required by La.Code Civ. Proc. art. 1880, so that the attorney general could elect whether or not to exercise his statutory right to represent the state’s interests in the proceedings prior to the declaration of unconstitutionality. See La.Rev.Stat. 49:257(B); Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), 646 So.2d 859, 865.