Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Jennifer THIEN and Gina Nguyen v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY and Agricultural and Mechanical College, et al.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI, TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE
This matter arises from a petition for damages and injunctive relief filed by plaintiffs against the Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agriculture and Mechanical College (“Board”) based on plaintiffs' expulsion from dental school. After trial, the district court granted plaintiffs' request for a permanent injunction and ordered their immediate reinstatement to the dental school. The district court found the procedure employed by the Board in handling the allegations against plaintiffs “clearly violated the plaintiffs' rights to procedural and substantive due process under the State and Federal Constitutions.”
The Board filed a motion for suspensive appeal pursuant to La. R.S. 13:4441. The district court denied the motion. Upon the Board's application, a majority of the court of appeal reversed and ordered the district court to grant the Board a suspensive appeal over dissents by two judges. Plaintiffs now seek review in this court.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for suspensive appeal filed by the Board of Supervisors. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 3612(B). The provisions of La. R.S. 13:4441 are inapplicable under the facts presented. See, e.g., Student Government Association v. Board of Supervisors, 262 La. 849, 264 So.2d 916 (1972) (explaining that the administrative powers granted to the Board of Supervisors are subject to other provisions of the constitution).
Accordingly, the writ is granted. The judgment of the court of appeal is reversed, and the judgment of the district court is reinstated.
The application for rehearing is granted for the sole purpose of amending our opinion of May 20, 2019 to delete the reference to “La. R.S. 13:4441” and replace it with “La. R.S. 13:4431.” In all other respects, the application for rehearing is denied, and our opinion of May 20, 2019 is affirmed as amended.
PER CURIAM
Johnson, C.J., would deny Clark, J., would deny.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: NO. 2019-CC-0429
Decided: May 20, 2019
Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)