Background
Following an unfavorable judgment in the 19th Judicial District Court for East Baton Rouge Parish, plaintiff Tonya Gordon Smith filed a motion for a new trial. Smith based her motion on the alleged discovery of new evidence that she claimed could not have been obtained with due diligence before or during the trial.
The trial court agreed with Smith and granted her motion for a new trial. The defendant, Janet Simmons (as Superintendent for the Recreation and Parks Commission of Baton Rouge Parish), disagreed with the trial court’s ruling. Simmons sought review from the Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit, by applying for a supervisory writ to have the appellate court intervene and overturn the order.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeal granted the writ and reversed the trial court’s judgment. The appellate court found that the trial court abused its discretion in granting the motion because the plaintiff, Tonya Gordon Smith, failed to meet her procedural and substantive burdens under the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure.
The court identified two key defects in the plaintiff’s motion. First, the plaintiff failed to verify the factual allegations in her motion with a sworn affidavit, which is a requirement under La. Code Civ. P. art. 1975. Second, at the hearing, the plaintiff failed to satisfy the crucial requirement of showing that the “newly discovered” evidence would likely tend to change the result of the case. Because the plaintiff did not meet her burden of proof, the Court of Appeal denied the motion for a new trial.
Key Takeaways
- In Louisiana, the party moving for a new trial bears the burden of proving they are entitled to relief.
- A motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence must be supported by an affidavit from the applicant verifying the factual allegations.
- To win a new trial based on new evidence, the mover must show the evidence would probably change the case’s outcome, not merely that it is new or relevant.
Why It Matters
This ruling reinforces the strict procedural requirements litigants must follow when seeking a new trial in Louisiana. It serves as a clear message that appellate courts will enforce these rules and will reverse trial courts that grant relief without ensuring the moving party has met their full burden of proof. For practicing attorneys, this case underscores that simply finding new evidence after a trial is insufficient. The evidence must be presented correctly, with a verifying affidavit, and counsel must be prepared to demonstrate that the new information is so significant that it would likely have led to a different judgment.