Duplessis v. Waste Connections of La. (In re Waste Connections of Bayou, Inc.)

1

MICHAEL DUPLESSIS v. WASTE CONNECTIONS OF LOUISIANA, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, AND LISA REED

IN RE WASTE CONNECTIONS BAYOU, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, AND LISA REED

No. 23-C-589

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit

January 22, 2024

APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE E. ADRIAN ADAMS, DIVISION "G", NUMBER 825-887

Panel composed of Judges Susan M. Chehardy, Fredericka Homberg Wicker, and Scott U.Schlegel

WRIT GRANTED FOR LIMITED PURPOSE; REMANDED

In this personal injury case, relators/defendants, Waste Connections Bayou, Inc., ACE American Insurance Company, and Lisa Reed seek review of the trial court's November 16, 2023 judgment denying their Motion to Compel Neuropsychological Evaluation. For the following reasons, we grant the writ application for the limited purpose of vacating the trial court's judgment and remanding for further proceedings on defendants' motion.

The trial court has the authority to order a party to submit to an examination when a plaintiff's condition is "in controversy," and there is "good cause" for the examination. La. C.C.P. art. 1464(A). A showing of "good cause" under La. C.C.P. art. 1464 requires that the moving party establish a reasonable nexus between the requested examination and the condition in controversy. Hicks v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 21-840 (La. 3/25/22), 339 So.3d 1106, 1108.

On September 8, 2023, defendants filed a "Motion to Compel Neuropsychological Evaluation and Amend Scheduling Order," pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 1464, asking the trial court to order Mr. Duplessis to submit to a neuropsychological evaluation by Dr. Kevin Greve. Defendants asserted that Mr. Duplessis was treated by a clinical psychologist, Dr. Beverly Howze, and her report sets forth her opinions and indicates that it is essential for Mr. Duplessis to complete neurological and neuropsychological assessments. In support of their motion, defendants attached Dr. Howze's report and other exhibits to their memorandum. On October 13, 2023, Mr. Duplessis filed a memorandum in opposition to defendants' motion and attached several exhibits as well.

Defendant's Motion to Compel Neuropsychological Evaluation came for hearing on October 23, 2023. At the hearing, the parties presented arguments and referred to their exhibits, but no evidence was introduced or admitted. After taking the matter under advisement, the trial court rendered a judgment denying the motion on November 16, 2023.

In this writ application, defendants contend that the trial court abused its discretion by denying their Motion to Compel a Neuropsychological Evaluation. However, after review, we find that we are unable to assess the merits of defendants' motion.

Although the parties attached exhibits to their memoranda in support of their arguments, we cannot consider these exhibits because the transcript reflects that they were not introduced or admitted into evidence at the hearing.

Evidence not properly and officially offered and introduced cannot be considered, even if the evidence is physically placed in the record. Scheuermann v. Cadillac of Metairie, Inc. 11-1149 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/31/12), 97 So.3d 423, 427, citing Denoux v. Vessel Management Services. Inc., 07-2143 (La. 5/21/08), 983 So.2d 84, 88. Documents attached to memoranda do not...