Ken Adams has an an interest commentary on this decision.

Michael, you may be right. I just checked Garner’s Modern American Usage, but found no answer to this question. My call: In this context, “Blind Boys of Alabama” is a singular noun referring to the group as a whole. So to form the possessive, follow the ordinary rule: add an apostrophe-s to the end. Thus, “Blind Boys of Alabama’s version of ‘Amazing Grace.’” But what if we’re talking about, say, a song by the Animals? I would follow the rule for possessive plurals and write “the Animals’ version of ‘House of the Rising Sun.’” Consistent? No. But who says that language is always logical?

This definition comes from Ambrose Bierce’s The Devil’s Dictionary, which you can find at http://www.alcyone.com/max/lit/devils/.

I don’t know. But I do know that it’s a matter of corporations law, not legal writing.

Yes, as a matter of fact. A party can file a motion to have an otherwise non-final judgment certified for immediate appeal under La. Code Civ. P. art. 1915(B) (our equivalent to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). And there is no time limit on the filing of the motion. See Fraternal Order of Police v. City of New Orleans, 831 So. 2d 897 (La. 2002).

Interesting, Maybe JP1 he needed the number because he was combining the names of the prior two popes.

A quotable quotation by Justice Dennis: “A party who is satisfied with a judgment, and who does not file a notice of appeal or a petition for review, is, nevertheless, a party to the appeal or review whose arguments must be heard, and in support of the judgment in his favor he may present any argument supported by the record, whether it was ignored, or flatly rejected, by the court below. This principle generally applies to all manner of review proceedings, although the discretionary nature of the grant of certiorari by a supreme court may make its application less certain in certiorari cases.” Roger v. Estate of Moulton, 513 So. 2d 1126, 1136 (La. 1987) (on rehearing). See also RPM Pizza, Inc. v. Automotive Cas. Ins. Co., 601 So. 2d 1366, 1370 (La. 1992).

Hit it, sort of. The opinion that this headnote comes from is a per curiam, with Judge Selya not on the panel. But it quotes U.S. v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, which was written by Judge Selya.

Thanks, Susan. There are actually two important lessons in K.A.E.M. v. J.C.M. One is the point that you mentioned. The other is that, when the court of appeal’s rules don’t allow for a rehearing, applying for rehearing will not interrupt the 30-day time limit to apply to the La. Supreme Court for a writ.

Actually my clients are litigation-savvy. They know what can and can’t be done on appeal.