Crayton v. Campbell

140 So. 3d 276, 14 La.App. 5 Cir. 114, 2014 WL 1622087, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 1089
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedApril 23, 2014
DocketNo. 2014-CA-114
StatusPublished

This text of 140 So. 3d 276 (Crayton v. Campbell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Crayton v. Campbell, 140 So. 3d 276, 14 La.App. 5 Cir. 114, 2014 WL 1622087, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 1089 (La. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

FREDERICKA HOMBERG WICKER, Judge.

| ^Defendants appeal the trial court’s granting of plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on the issues of liability and insurance coverage. For the following reasons, we find this Court lacks appellate jurisdiction as the judgment appealed is not a final, appealable judgment. We therefore dismiss this appeal and reserve to defendants the right to file an application for supervisory writ to this Court within thirty days of the date of this opinion.

[277]*277 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, Toni G. Crayton, filed suit against defendants, Chad William Campbell and ACE American Insurance Company, for damages arising out of an August 23, 2013 motor vehicle accident. After preliminary discovery, plaintiff filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the issues of liability and insurance coverage. After a hearing on the motion, the trial judge granted plaintiffs motion, finding that defendant Chad William Campbell was solely at fault in the accident |aand that defendant ACE American Insurance Company provided liability insurance coverage on the date of the accident. Defendants appeal.

DISCUSSION

The judgment at issue in this case is a partial judgment because it disposes only of liability and coverage issues but does not address the issue of plaintiffs damages. With regard to partial summary judgments, this Court has found:

A partial judgment may be a final judgment even if it does not grant the successful party all of the relief prayed for or adjudicate all of the issues in the case. La. C.C.P. art. 1915(A). La. C.C.P. art. 1915(A) lists partial judgments that are final. That list includes a trial court grant of “a motion for summary judgment, as provided by [Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure] Articles 966 through 969, but not including a summary judgment granted pursuant to [Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure] Article 966(E).” La. C.C.P. art. 1915(A)(3).
La. C.C.P. art. 966(E) provides for the grant of summary judgments in favor of any one or more of the parties to the litigation that are “dispositive of a particular issue, theory of recovery, cause of action, or defense” even if the grant of “the summary judgment does not dispose of the entire case.”
[[Image here]]
Nevertheless, even if a partial summary judgment does not qualify as a final judgment under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(A)(3), it may still constitute a final judgment for the purpose of an immediate appeal if it is designated as a final judgment by the trial court after an express determination that there is no just reason for delay. La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B)(1). However, in the absence of such a designation, such a judgment “shall not constitute a final judgment for the purpose of an immediate appeal.” La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B)(2).

Pontchartrain Tavern, Inc. v. Johnson, 07-115 (La.App. 5 Cir. 8/28/07), 966 So.2d 1062, 1063-64.

The partial summary judgment at issue in this case does not dispose of the entire litigation, but only resolves the issues of liability and insurance coverage. Therefore, it is not a partial final judgment as contemplated by La. C.C.P. art. 141915(A).1 Further, the trial court in this case has not designated its partial summary judgment a final judgment in accordance with La. [278]*278C.C.P. art. 1915(B).2 Thus, since the judgment at issue is not a final judgment under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(A) and has not been properly designated a final judgment as provided in La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B), it is not appealable as one “in which appeals are given by law.” La. C.C.P. art. 2083(A).

Accordingly, we find the judgment appealed is not a final, appealable judgment and that this Court lacks appellate jurisdiction to consider the merits of defendants’ appeal. We therefore dismiss this appeal and reserve to defendants the right to file an application for supervisory writ within thirty days of the date of this opinion.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pontchartrain Tavern, Inc. v. Johnson
966 So. 2d 1062 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 So. 3d 276, 14 La.App. 5 Cir. 114, 2014 WL 1622087, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 1089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crayton-v-campbell-lactapp-2014.