Baxter v. Scott

• Citation: 847 So.2d 225
• Decision Date: 19 June 2003
• Docket Number: No. 37,092-CW.,37,092-CW.
• Parties: RICHARD L. BAXTER, Respondent v. JOHN L. SCOTT, Applicant.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana (US)

Page 1

RICHARD L. BAXTER, Respondent v. JOHN L. SCOTT, Applicant.

No. 37,092-CW.

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

Judgment rendered June 19, 2003.

On Application for Rehearing on Writ of Review Directed to the Fourth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Ouachita, Louisiana Trial Court No. 021866, Honorable Alvin R. Sharp, Judge.

J. MICHAEL RHYMES, Counsel for Applicant.

FORRESTER, JORDAN & DICK, By: Shelly D. Dick, Counsel for Respondent.

Before WILLIAMS, STEWART, GASKINS, PEATROSS, and DREW, JJ.

ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

On May 16, 2003, this court rendered an opinion in the above entitled writ matter. We reversed the trial court's denial of a special motion to strike filed by John L. Scott pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 971 against Richard L. Baxter's petition alleging defamation. We granted the motion to strike, dismissed Baxter's action with prejudice, and assessed costs to him.

On May 28, 2003, Judge Stewart signed an order denying a joint motion to dismiss that had been filed on behalf of Baxter and Scott on May 5, 2003, just prior to the opinion being rendered.

Thereafter, on May 30, 2002, Baxter filed a "Motion To Traverse or Alternatively, Application For Rehearing By Richard L. Baxter." Baxter asserts that the opinion of this court was moot when rendered on May 16, 2003, because this court had been informed by way of the joint motion to dismiss that the parties had amicably resolved their differences. Baxter further asserts that the opinion is nothing more than an advisory opinion since this court was aware that the parties had settled their differences. In his prayer for relief, Baxter asks either that the ruling be traversed or rehearing be granted in accordance with Rule 2-18.7 of the Uniform Rules - Courts of Appeal ("U.R.C.A."). He further asks that the opinion be recalled and the writ matter dismissed as moot.

Baxter bases his arguments on the fact that a joint motion to dismiss was filed prior to the opinion being rendered. Although this matter involves a writ rather than an appeal, the uniform rules applicable to appeals apply as provided by U.R.C.A. 4-8, insofar as such rules do not conflict with rules specifically pertaining to writs.

La. C.C.P. art. 2162 provides that "(a)n appeal can be dismissed at any time by consent of all parties." Joint motions to dismiss are specifically addressed in Rule 2-8.3 of the U.R.C.A., which provides as follows:

Any appeal may be summarily dismissed or remanded by order...