Glenwood Hosp., Inc. v. Louisiana Hosp. Service, Inc.

Citation419 So.2d 1269
Decision Date24 August 1982
Docket NumberNo. 14872,14872
CourtCourt of Appeal of Louisiana (US)
PartiesGLENWOOD HOSPITAL, INC. v. LOUISIANA HOSPITAL SERVICE, INC.

Kent Breard, Monroe, for plaintiff-appellee Glenwood Hosp., Inc. (now Glenwood Regional Medical Center).

John S. White, Jr., A. Michael Dufilho, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant Louisiana Hosp. Service, Inc. (now Louisiana Health Service and Indem. Co.)

Before LOTTINGER, EDWARDS and SHORTESS, JJ.

EDWARDS, Judge.

Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc. appeals a judgment condemning it to pay $15,005.00 plus interest to plaintiff-appellee, Glenwood Hospital, Inc. We affirm.

On February 28, 1974, Glenwood Hospital, Inc., hereinafter Glenwood, filed suit against Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc., hereinafter Blue Cross, 1 alleging that Blue Cross had, in violation of its contract with Glenwood, wrongfully withheld certain payments due Glenwood under numerous patients' individual insurance contracts. The conflict centered around whether or not "Sani-Sets," admit kits containing certain items, 2 which were issued to every in-hospital patient at Glenwood, were medical supplies and therefore covered by insurance payments from Blue Cross. Glenwood urged that the Sani-Sets were medical supplies, while Blue Cross disagreed.

Following several procedural developments, on July 26, 1976, both parties, in an apparent attempt to simplify matters, stipulated that

"... they hereby agree to submit to the Court at a trial one limited issue of whether or not 'Sani-Sets' are covered under the Member Hospital Agreement and/or B/C subscriber contract ....

"The judgment to be rendered after trial will state the Court's opinion on this limited issue without prejudice to or effect upon the rights of the parties in any other respect."

Trial was had on December 2-3, 1976. On May 5, 1977, all parties were notified that Judge McGehee had held that Sani-Sets were not items covered by any agreement. Significantly, no written reasons for judgment were issued and no judgment to this effect was ever signed. Judge McGehee eventually left the bench and was replaced by Judge Gonzales.

On March 27, 1980, almost three years later, both parties stipulated in the record that, among other things,

"... in event of recovery by plaintiff against defendant in full, the defendant would owe FIFTEEN THOUSAND, FIVE AND 00/100 ($15,005.00) DOLLARS to plaintiff, plus legal interest and all Court costs."

Both parties, with approval of the court, subsequently agreed to submit the case on briefs and without oral argument.

On May 20, 1981, Judge Gonzales issued written reasons for judgment. Not feeling bound by the May 5, 1977, determination of Judge McGehee, Judge Gonzales found that Sani-Sets were medical supplies and that Blue Cross therefore owed Glenwood $15,005.00 plus interest. Judgment was signed on June 8, 1981. After Blue Cross' motion for a new trial was denied on July 8, 1981, the present suspensive appeal was taken.

On appeal, Blue Cross' only specification of error is that, contrary to the doctrine of "law of the case," Judge Gonzales reversed the allegedly reasonable ruling of Judge McGehee.

The law of the case principle relates to (a) the binding force of a trial judge's rulings during later stages of trial, (b) the conclusive effects of appellate rulings at trial on remand and (c) the rule that an appellate court ordinarily will not reconsider its own rulings of law on a subsequent appeal in the same case. The law of the case principle is merely a discretionary guide, however. Reargument in the same case of a previously decided point will be barred where there is simply a doubt as to the correctness of the earlier ruling. But in cases of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • Succession Crute v. Crute
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • August 30, 2017
    ...law of the case were applied, manifest injustice would occur. Jones, 723 So.2d at 494, citing Glenwood Hosp., Inc. v. Louisiana Hosp. Serv., Inc. , 419 So.2d 1269, 1271 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1982). We find that this is a case where palpable error has occurred, or if the discretionary law-of-the-......
  • Quality Envtl. Processes, Inc. v. IP Petroleum Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • April 12, 2017
    ...applied, manifest injustice would occur. Jones v. McDonald's Corp. , 723 So.2d at 494, citing Glenwood Hosp., Inc. v. Louisiana Hosp. Serv., Inc. , 419 So.2d 1269, 1271 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1982). The doctrine applies only against those who were parties to the case when the earlier decision was......
  • Scott v. Am. Tobacco Co. Inc
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • May 12, 2010
    ...Jones v. McDonald's Corp., 97-2287, pp. 4-5 (La.App. 1 Cir. 11/6/98), 723 So.2d 492, 494; Glenwood Hospital, Inc. v. Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc., 419 So.2d 1269, 1271 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982). Although the parties have made plain their dissatisfaction and disappointment in some of our pr......
  • Sharkey v. Sterling Drug, Inc.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • April 23, 1992
    ...an appellate court ordinarily will not reconsider its own rulings of law in the same case. Glenwood Hospital, Inc. v. Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc., 419 So.2d 1269, 1271 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982). The doctrine is a discretionary guide and is not applicable in cases of palpable error or wher......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT