Summary
The Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit declined to consider Katherine Diamond Ragland’s supervisory writ application because she failed to include copies of all evidence admitted at the hearing. The court also determined that the application appeared untimely, identified the applicable appellate rules, and stated the requirements and deadline for any new application.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the supervisory writ application could be considered when the relator failed to include copies of all evidence admitted at the hearing.
- Whether the supervisory writ application could be considered when it was filed after the applicable return date.
Holdings
- A supervisory writ application will not be considered when it does not include copies of all evidence admitted at the hearing.
- A supervisory writ application filed after the applicable return date is untimely and will not be considered.
- Supplementation of the writ application and an application for rehearing will not be considered to cure the deficiencies identified in the ruling.
Key quotations
“WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. Relator failed to include copies of all evidence admitted at the January 28, 2026 hearing”
“Although it appears relator timely filed a notice of intent, the writ application was not filed on or before the return date of March g, 2026, as extended by the trial court.”
Factual background
The writ application arose from a January 28, 2026 hearing in which evidence was admitted, including communications, a website screenshot, discovery requests, a doctor's note, and a prior lawsuit. The relator did not include copies of all admitted evidence with the supervisory writ application and filed the application one day after the extended return date.
Procedural history
The trial court held a hearing on January 28, 2026. Although the relator appears to have timely filed a notice of intent, the supervisory writ application was filed on March 10, 2026, after the March 9, 2026 return date, and it omitted copies of evidence admitted at the hearing. The Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit, did not consider the writ application and stated the requirements for any new application.
Remand instructions
The writ application was not considered. If the relator files a new application, it must include all pertinent documentation, including the omitted evidence and documentation showing that the original application was timely, comply with Uniform Rules of Louisiana Courts of Appeal Rule 2-12.2, include a copy of this ruling, and be filed on or before July 13, 2026.