Dixon v. Cain

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that, at the end of the 30-day period in Melancon, “no supervisory writ application had been filed”
• observing that, at 11 Case: 18-30374 Document: 00515296327 Page: 12 Date Filed: 02/03/2020 No. 18-30374 the end of the 30-day period in Melancon, “no supervisory writ application had been filed”
• explaining that “Louisiana courts consider the trial court’s setting of a return date later than thirty days to be an implicit extension . . . in accordance with Rule 4-3
• explaining that “Louisiana courts consider the trial court’s setting of a return date later than thirty days to be an implicit extension . . . in accordance with Rule 4-3
• observing that “Rule 4-3 of Louisiana’s Uniform Rules, Courts of Appeal, provides that the trial court must state ‘a reasonable time,’ ‘not to exceed thirty days,’ in which the applicant must apply to the appellate court.”
• observing that “Rule 4-3 of Louisiana’s Uniform Rules, Courts of Appeal, provides that the trial court must state ‘a reasonable time,’ ‘not to exceed thirty days,’ in which the applicant must apply to the appellate court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).