Estate of Queen v. Select Portfolio Servicing — Louisiana First Circuit denies supervisory writ

Case
Estate of Earnest Queen Sr. and Constance Queen v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. and Kevin Funk, Chief Financial Officer
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit
Judge
PENZATO (appointment info not available); Greene (elected 2022); FIELDS (appointment info not available)
Date Decided
2026-07-27
Docket No.
2026 CW 0637
Topics
Supervisory Writs, Appellate Procedure, Estate Law
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The Estate of Earnest Queen Sr. and Constance Queen sought supervisory writs from the Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit. The application originated from proceedings in the 19th Judicial District Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, under docket number 769160. The specific facts or legal issues prompting the application for supervisory review were not detailed in the brief order issued by the appellate court.

The Court’s Holding

The Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit, issued a per curiam order summarily denying the application for supervisory writs filed by the Estate of Earnest Queen Sr. and Constance Queen. The order, signed by Judges Penzato, Greene, and Fields, provided no reasons or legal analysis for the denial, simply stating “WRIT DENIED.”

This means the appellate court declined to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction to review or intervene in the ongoing proceedings in the lower court at this stage.

Key Takeaways

  • The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal summarily denied an application for supervisory writs.
  • The court provided no explanation or legal reasoning for its denial.
  • A denial of supervisory writs indicates the appellate court found no compelling reason to immediately intervene in the lower court’s decision or ongoing proceedings.

Why It Matters

In Louisiana practice, supervisory writs are an extraordinary remedy used to correct errors in the lower court before a final judgment is rendered. The summary denial of a supervisory writ application typically signifies that the appellate court does not perceive a clear abuse of discretion by the trial court, an irreparable injury, or a legal error requiring immediate appellate intervention. For the Estate of Queen, this denial means the ruling or order they sought to challenge will stand, and the case will proceed in the 19th Judicial District Court without appellate intercession at this juncture.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top