Elawyers Elawyers

Tommy Naquin v. Prudential Assurance Co., Ltd., 94-30480 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 94-30480 Visitors: 18
Filed: Dec. 13, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 71 F.3d 512 Tommy NAQUIN, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE CO., LTD., et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-30480. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Dec. 13, 1995. Jerry B. Read, Biloxi, MS, for appellants. Harold K. Watson, Michael L. Goldstone, Liddell, Sapp, Ziveley, Brown & Laboon, Houston, TX, Warren M. Faris, James R. Swanson, Stone, Pigman, Walther, Wittmann & Hutchinson, L.L.P., New Orleans, Mat M. Gray, III, Thomas C.W. Ellis, Rice, Fowler, Kingsmill, V
More

71 F.3d 512

Tommy NAQUIN, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE CO., LTD., et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-30480.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 13, 1995.

Jerry B. Read, Biloxi, MS, for appellants.

Harold K. Watson, Michael L. Goldstone, Liddell, Sapp, Ziveley, Brown & Laboon, Houston, TX, Warren M. Faris, James R. Swanson, Stone, Pigman, Walther, Wittmann & Hutchinson, L.L.P., New Orleans, Mat M. Gray, III, Thomas C.W. Ellis, Rice, Fowler, Kingsmill, Vance, Flint & Booth, New Orleans, Richard M. Perles, Kops, Lee, Futrell & Perles, L.L.P., New Orleans, for appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Before SMITH, WIENER and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

1

After this panel heard oral argument of the subject case on August 9, 1995, we filed an opinion certifying questions of state law to the Supreme Court of Louisiana.1 That court, however, declined to accept certification, with Chief Justice Calogero casting the lone vote to accept certification. Refusal to accept certification thus required this court to make an "Erie guess" and decide the case. Before we were able to do so, however, the parties executed a stipulation of settlement which included a request that we dismiss this appeal with prejudice. In light of the foregoing, therefore,IT IS ORDERED that this appeal be and it is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.

1

Naquin, et al. v. Prudential Assurance Co., Ltd., et al., 65 F.3d 427 (5th Cir.1995)

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer