NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT WILBERT ROGERS II VERSUS RICHARD STALDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Similar documents
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2007 CA 0938 VALERIA ANN PRICE AND WALTER KRODSEL III VERSUS

FIRST CIRCUIT RAYMOND ROCHON VERSUS. Judgment Rendered February Appealed from the. Case No Plaintiff Appellant.

WARDEN LYNN COOPER MS TONIA RACHAL

NO. 45,008-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * Versus * * * * * *

Honorable Trudy M White Judge Presiding

Judgment Rendered FEB I

In and for the Parish of St Mary Louisiana Docket Number

COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2007 CU 2423 VERSUS KRISTIN MICHELLE NEZAT. Judgment Rendered May State of Louisiana Docket.

Judgment Rendered May Appealed from the

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2008 CA 1967 VERSUS

RICHARD STALDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF BLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS AND VENETIA MICHAEL WARDEN DAVID WADE CORRECTIONAL CENTER

JttJ 57AJJ I MCCI 7. Appealed. Joseph G Jevic III. Nykeba R Walker Shone T Pierre NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. Judgment Rendered MAR

Judgment Rendered AUG

On Appeal from the Office of Workers Compensation Administration District 9 Docket No

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2009 CA 0960 DONNA GRODNER AND DENISE VINET VERSUS

No. 52,555-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

Judgment Rendered September

2006 CA 0567 ESPLANADE L L C VERSUS. Judgment. Counsel for Plaintiff Appellant. Esplanade LL C. Counsel for Defendants Appellees

CORRECTIONS LOUISIANA BOARD OF PAROLE

Appealed from the Office of Workers Compensation Administration District 5 In and for the State of Louisiana Docket Number

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT CA **********

STATE OF LOUISIANA FIRST CIRCUIT 2008 CA 1831 VERSUS STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY. Judgment Rendered March

In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT CW **********

PARRO GUIDRY AND HUGHES JJ

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2011 CA 0176 MAXINE HUGHES DICKENS VERSUS LOUISIANA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE FOR WOMEN

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL SOUTHERN CHIROPRACTIC AND SPORTS VERSUS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION FIRST CIRCUIT 2007 CA 1585

10W. d Judgment Rendered June Neurology Clinic of Mandeville. Appealed from the Twenty First Judicial District Court.

NOT DESIGNATED for PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT VERSUS

OCT Judgment Rendered:

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2009 CA 0027 VERSUS GUIDE ONE INSURANCE COMPANY AND MCKOWEN BAPTIST CHURCH

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2010 CW 1386 BATON ROUGE POLICE DEPARTMENT VERSUS CHARLES OMALLEY

No. 52,410-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

Honorable Janice Clark, Judge Presiding

l1cc101 G11au J he NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION MAR Judgment Rendered Appealed from the Twenty Third Judicial District Court Attorney for

No. 51,245-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

Appealed from the Twenty Second Judicial District Court

19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT EXCEPTION OF PRESCRIPTION AND, ALTERNATIVELY, EXCEPTION OF NO CAUSE OF ACTION

Judgment Rendered December

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2007 CA 1701 AARON TURNER LLC VERSUS. Judgment Rendered June

FIRST CIRCUIT VERSUS. Judgment Rendered: APR * * * * * Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellee, Linda Rosenberg-Kennett

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2006 CA 1975 VERSUS

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT BLOCK T OPERATING, LLC, ET AL. **********

THE RIGHT OF AN INDIGENT JUVENILE IN OHIO TO A TRANSCRIPT AT STATE EXPENSE

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2011 CA 0838 EUGENIE TOBIN ELLIS D BRENT JR CHARLES E TONEY JR KYE LEWIS DADRIUS LANUS

ACCESS TO JUSTICE: COMMON PROCEDURAL ISSUES CONFRONTED BY THE IN FORMA PAUPERIS PRACTITIONER. Ashley P. Gonzalez 1

FIRST CIRCillT BRIAN K ABELS VERSUS. Judgment Rendered December

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 4, 2000 Session

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT BOBBIE JEAN PATIN VERSUS. Judgment Rendered June Appealed from the

Judgment rendered September. Anthony G Falterman FIRST CIRCUIT VERSUS JOSHUA WEATHERSPOON BEFORE NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

CASE NO. 1D Sarah J. Rumph, General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2013 CW 0863 R GERALD BELL, SR. AND LULAROSE S. BELL VERSUS

COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT VERSUS. Judgment Rendered September. Appealed from the. In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana

The Honorable Timothy E Kelley Judge Presiding

1 CLERK OF COURT. Court of Appeal First Circuit. Tangipahoa Parish School System and Donna Drude. Covington

INMATE FORM FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS INSTRUCTIONS READ CAREFULLY

Judgment Rendered DEe

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2007 CA 1856 VERSUS UNKNOWN INSURANCE COMPANY C. Judgment rendered AUG ON REHEARING

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

2006 CA STATE Of LOUISIANA. COURT Of APPEAL. first CIRCUIT LOTTIE MORGAN VERSUS. CITY Of BATON ROUGE AND PARISH Of EAST BATON ROUGE

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2006 CA 0808 FELTON HOGAN VERSUS JOE MORGAN M D DATE OF JUDGMENT APR

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2007 CU 1942 DANA GOLEMI AND ROBERT GOLEMI VERSUS JO TYLER AND RUSSELL ROBERTS

No. 50,936-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *

No. 49,116-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * * * * * * * By: C. A. Martin, III * * * * *

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBILCATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2008CA2521 VERSUS. Judgment Rendered June

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs June 19, 2007

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA FIRST CIRCUIT VERSUS. Judgment. Appealed from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2014 COA 44

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT **********

Department of Public Safety and

i< 1--f 1/AJ/ ct' (!_ t2 ;tf'c'r:tr_..sv W.:S;5; (:;;' ~)S

CHAPTER 27. FEES AND COSTS IN APPELLATE COURTS AND ON APPEAL FEES COSTS

No. 52,304-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT ENTERGY GULF STATES LOUISIANA, LLC **********

Appeal from the. Attorneys for Plaintiff Appellant. Attorneys for Defendants Appellees

Judgment rendered 1AY 2 Z008

LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2007 CA 0559 DEREK M LANDRY VERSUS. Judgment

No. 47,886-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2007 CA Judgment Rendered AUG State of Louisiana

No. 44,034-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

No. 45,122-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *

INMATE FORM FOR CIVIL ACTIONS FILED IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT **********

NO. CAAP IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT CHILDREN S CLINIC OF SOUTHWEST LOUISIANA, ET AL.

Honorable Wilson E Fields Judge

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 44,058-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * *

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE JOHN T. BRAWLEY. Argued: June 14, 2018 Opinion Issued: September 18, 2018

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2008 KW 1859 VERSUS EARL LANE CONSOLIDATED WITH VERSUS DEBBIE LYNN LONG.

No. 49,130-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *

No. 52,034-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

No. 51,461-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

No. 44,069-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA AND * * * * *

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS. Judgment Rendered June

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION RYAN GOOTEE GENERAL CONTRACTORS LLC NO CA-0678 COURT OF APPEAL VERSUS PLAQUEMINES PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, ET AL.

Transcription:

NOT DESGNATED FOR PUBLCATON STATE OF LOUSANA COURT OF APPEAL FRST CRCUT NUMBER 2006 CA 0647 WLBERT ROGERS U VERSUS RCHARD STALDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTONS f LYNN COOPER WARDEN AVOYELLES CORRECTONAL CENTER AND RUSSELL LACHNEY CLASSFCATONS OFFCER AVOYELLES krj L CORRECTONAL CENTER Judgment Rendered February 14 2007 Appealed from the Nineteenth Judicial District Comi n and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State Of Louisiana Suit Number 521 518 Judge Kay Bates Presiding Wilbert R Rogers CottonpOli LA Charles C Foti Jr Tunde M Anima Shaun Baton Rouge LA Plaintiff Appellant n Proper Person Counsel for Defendants Appellees Richard Stalder Lynn Cooper and Russell Lachney BEFORE PARRO GUDRY AND McCLENDON JJ

GUDRY J n this appeal a pnsoner seeks revew of the district comi s judgment assessing comi costs against him upon the dismissal of his petition for judicial revew For the reasons that follow we affinll FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HSTORY Plaintiff is an inmate in the custody of the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Conections Depmiment confined in the A voyelles Correctional Center Plaintiff filed a request for administrative remedy alleging he was denied the privilege of enrolling in vocational technical vo tech classes and denied his request to lift weights for strengthening maintaining his upper body second step responses from the Depmiment denied his requests The first and Thereafter plaintiff filed a petition for judicial review and an accompanying motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the district comi The district comi granted plaintiffs motion and upon review the Commissioner issued a stay order and remanded the matter to the first step level for re consideration Following the Depmiment s compliance with this order the Commissioner issued his recommendation n his recommendation the Commissioner found that the Depmiment s decision denying plaintiffs enrollment in vo tech classes and denying his request to lift weights was not arbitrary capricious or in violation of any of plaintiff s lights and recommended that the Depmiment s decision be affirmed and the appeal be dismissed at plaintiffs cost Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion to traverse the Commissioner s recommendation Following its de novo consideration of the entire record the district comi rendered judgment affirming the Department s decision and dismissing plaintiffs suit with prejudice at his cost Plaintiff now appeals from this judgment asseliing that the district comi s assessment of comi costs against him violates his fundamental right to due process 2

DSCUSSON Due process under the state and federal constitutions reqmres as a minimum and in the absence of a countervailing state interest of overriding significance that persons forced to settle their claims through the judicial process must be given a meaningful oppoliunity to be heard See La Const Art S 22 see also Boddie v Connecticut 401 U S 371 377 91 S Ct 780 785 787 28 L Ed 2d 113 1971 and cases cited therein As such it is an unjustifiable denial of due process to deny an indigent plaintiff access to the comis on the ground of nonpayment of a fee Boddie 401 U S at 380 381 91 S Ct at 787 Bolden v City of ShrevepOli 278 So 2d 138 141 La App 2nd Cir 1973 The Louisiana legislature cognizant of this right has provided celiain safeguards to ensure that an individual s right to due process is not abridged by the imposition of comi costs and fees See La C C P arts 5181 5188 see also Johnson v First National Bank of ShrevepOli 00 2496 00 2487 002498 p 9 La 515 01 786 So 2d 84 90 Specifically La C C P mi 5181 A provides in pmi that an individual who is unable to pay the costs of comi because of his poveliy and lack of means may prosecute or defend a judicial proceeding in any trial or appellate comi without paying the costs in advance or as they accrue or furnishing security therefore The grant of the privilege to litigate without prepayment of costs is designed to assure that no individual is deprived of his day in comi merely because of his lack of financial means to payor secure court costs Beniamin v National Super Markets nc 351 So 2d 138 141 La 1977 t is to be borne in mind however that the grant of the privilege to litigate in farina pauperis is founded upon the view that in effect the governmental bodies are merely furnishing without prepayment of cost its resources to the financially embarrassed litigant in order to prevent his losing his day in comi merely because of the financial expense to the government of enteliaining his claim Beniamin 3

351 So 2d at 141 Of course the litigant remains liable for the costs in the event judgment is rendered against him despite the granting of the privilege allowing him to proceed without their prepayment or bonding See La C C P art 5186 5188 1 Based on the foregoing we find that the district court s imposition of court costs against plaintiff did not violate his right to due process as guaranteed by the state and federal constitutions Plaintiff was given the privilege of filing his petition for judicial review and having his claim considered several times by the district comi without the burden of prepaying any necessary costs or fees At the conclusion of its review the district comi found in favor of the Depmiment and dismissed plaintiffs petition at his cost This assessment compolis with the principles of due process outlined above and the mandate of La C C P mi 5188 CONCLUSON For the foregoing reasons we affinn the judgment of the district comi assessing costs in this matter to plaintiff Additionally all costs of this appeal are Louisiana Code ofcivil Procedure article 5186 provides An account shall be kept of all costs incuned by a pmiy who has been permitted to litigate without the payment of costs by the public officers to whom these costs would be payable f judgment is rendered in favor of the indigent party the pmiy against whom the judgment is rendered shall be condemned to pay all costs due such officers who have a privilege on the judgment superior to the rights of the indigent pmiy or his attorney f judgment is rendered against the indigent plaintiff and he is condemned to pay comi costs an affidavit of the account by an officer to whom costs are due recorded in the m01igage records shall have the effect of a judgment for the payment due Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 5188 provides Except as otherwise provided by Aliicles 1920 and 2164 if judgment is rendered against a pmiy who has been permitted to litigate without the payment of costs he shall be condemned to pay the costs incurred by him in accordance with the provisions of Aliicle 5186 and Emphasis added those recoverable by the adverse pmiy 4

to be assessed against the plaintiff appellant Wilbert Rogers 11 2 AFFRMED 2 See Rochon v Administrative Remedv Procedure 05 0452 p 3 n 2 La App 1 st Cir 3 24 06 934 So 2d 67 68 n2 State in nterest of EG 95 0018 pp 6 7 La App 6 23 95 657 So 2d 1094 1098 writ denied 95 1865 La 91 95 658 So 2d 1263 1 st Cir 5