State ex rel. Grunewald v. Judges of the Court of Appeals for the Parish
Citations
- 105 La. 217
Syllabus
<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>The Civil District Court having dismissed plaintiff’s suit for want of jurisdiction rations materias by reason of the amount of the matter in dispute not being shown to exceed one hundred dollars, he appealed to the court of appeals. The latter court dismissed this appeal for the reason that the suit was not for the ownership but for the possession of real estate, there being no evidence before it of the value of the “right of possession.”</p> <p>Under such circumstances the Supreme Court will not, under its supervisory jurisdiction, mdndamus the court of appeals to take jurisdiction of the appeal.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- denying summary judgment and judicial estoppel when movant did not 13 show “any purported position taken by [nonmovant] was deliberate . . . [or] were not ‘a result of 14 ignorance, fraud, or mistake.’”
- in considering the “sham affidavit rule,” 12 noting “the court is not to make credibility determinations when granting or denying summary 13 judgment”
- “Courts may judicially notice facts of public record in a judicial or administrative proceeding that directly relate to the matters at issue, such as the existence of a motion or of representations made therein.”
- reciting the elements of judicial estoppel
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Nicholls
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.