Back to Uniform Rules Menu
APPENDIX B. COMMENTS ON RULES
Comments on Rule 1-5
The first sentence provides for the usual 3-judge panel to hear cases. The second sentence adds the constitutional requirement of 5-judge panels in the case of modification or reversal, in a civil matter, with one dissent. The use of the word "resubmitted" allows for the situation where the case was originally submitted without oral argument. It has been the practice that if the case was originally argued orally, it is again argued orally before 5 judges, but if the case was originally submitted without oral argument, it is submitted to the 5-judge panel without oral argument. LSA-Const. Art. 5, § 8(B). In Sarpy v. Sarpy, 359 So.2d 750 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1978), writ denied, 360 So.2d 1178 (La.1978), the court said:"The purpose of Section 8(B) is to require reconsideration by a larger panel "prior to rendition of judgment' whenever the original panel proposes to reverse or modify the trial court judgment, unless the original panel votes unanimously to do so. . . ."Once the judgment is rendered reversing the trial court judgment, Section 8(B) does not require unanimity of the appellate court on an application to reconsider the unanimous judgment of reversal."Criminal cases are excepted from the 5-judge provision. LSA-Const. Art. 5, § 8(B).The third sentence takes care of appeals in election cases. LSA-R.S. 18:1409H. The last sentence is to take care of any special situations.
COMMENTS ON RULE 2-1.4 Amended July 1, 2012
Appellate courts are scanning records into document management systems. The front cover of the record is required to be "strong" with a list of information inscribed thereon. Scanners cannot handle the "strong" cover material so this rule is being revised to require a regular paper copy of the first volume's front cover to be included in the record to facilitate scanning.
COMMENTS ON RULE 2-3
This Rule is to make it clear that the record is to be transcribed for the appellate court in an appeal where the testimony was electronically recorded, and that tapes, cassettes, or other recordings are not to be sent up as the testimony in such cases. This Rule does not affect those cases wherein the testimony of witnesses has been taken by stenotype, stenograph, or any other customary or mechanical means.
COMMENTS ON RULE 2-4
The statute providing for the fees is LSA-R.S. 13:352.
COMMENTS ON RULE 2-9
This Rule, providing for the substitution of parties, is taken from Rule 13 of the S.Ct. Rules. The references to substitution of parties in the former Rules are contained in the Rule dealing with Remedial Writs, C.A., R 12, S 7, and in Rule 13 dealing with Proceedings in Case of Death (which is unnecessarily detailed). The Rule is intended to make for more uniformity in the appellate courts, as well as in the trial courts.
COMMENTS ON RULE 2-1.17
This Rule is to take care of the situation where a party in a civil case wishes to designate the record as provided in LSA-C.C.P. art. 2128.
Pursuant to C.Cr.P. art. 845 [repealed; see, now, C.Cr.P. art. 914.1], the appellant in a criminal case is required to designate the portions of the record on appeal. Other portions may be designated by the appellee (state) or the trial and appellate courts.
COMMENTS ON RULE 2-18
This Rule encompasses a detailed explanation of the requirements of the application for rehearing, and the rehearing procedure. The application for rehearing, in order to be timely, must be filed with the clerk of the Court of Appeal on or before 14 calendar days after the delivery or mailing of the notice of judgment, and no extension of time will be granted. LSA-C.C.P. art. 2166. Repeated applications for rehearing will not be countenanced.
(West note: This comment was modified in 2001 to reflect a 1983 amendment to C.C. P. Art. 2166)
COMMENTS ON RULE 2-19
This Rule is based on LSA-C.C.P. art. 2164.
COMMENTS ON RULE 3-1
The Rule is adapted from the former Rule dealing with Appeals from Decisions of Civil Service Commission, etc., with only cosmetic changes, and the elimination of the bond for costs. All administrative body decisions have been combined into one Rule based on the source provision, C.A., R 16.
COMMENTS ON RULE 3-2
This Rule is to take care of the situation where the delays for taking an appeal have elapsed through no fault of the defendant. There is a constitutional right to an appeal in criminal cases, which right can only be waived by the defendant himself. LSA-Const., Art. 1, § 19; State v. Simmons, 390 So.2d 504 (La.1980).
COMMENTS ON RULE 4
The Rule applies to all writs, whether in civil or criminal actions, so the writs are not specifically referred to as supervisory or remedial, or as writ of certiorari or the like. See LSA-C.C.P. art. 2201.
COMMENTS ON RULE 4-3
In civil cases, Rule 4-3 has been revised to coordinate the date of the beginning of the 30-day period for setting a return date with the date of notice of the ruling at issue, in accordance with the notice rules of La. C.C.P. art. 1914 as amended by Act 545 of 2003. The "ruling at issue" refers to any interlocutory judgment, order, or ruling of the trial court.In the interests of judicial efficiency and fairness to the parties, an appellate court in its discretion may review an interlocutory or final judgment pursuant to its supervisory jurisdiction, even though the judgment also could be reviewed pursuant to an appeal. See Chambers v. LeBlanc, 598 So.2d 337 (La. 1992); Winston v. Martin, 34,195 (La. App. 2 Cir. 7/6/00), 764 So. 2d 368; Smith v. Louisiana Dept. of Public Safety, 90-1029 (La. App. 3 Cir. 10/15/90), 571 So.2d 666; Hamilton Medical Group v. Ochsner Health Plan, 550 So.2d 290 (La. App 3 Cir. 1989). The 30-day period in Rule 4-3 in no way affects an appellate court’s ability to utilize its supervisory jurisdiction in such instances.