Derrie Lee Remo Versus Rose Marie Tindal Newson

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: April 24, 2024
• Docket: 23-CA-509
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

DERRIE LEE REMO NO. 23-CA-509

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

ROSE MARIE TINDAL NEWSON COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

ON APPEAL FROM THE FORTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST, STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 78,958, DIVISION "C" HONORABLE J. STERLING SNOWDY, JUDGE PRESIDING

April 24, 2024

TIMOTHY S. MARCEL JUDGE

Panel composed of Judges Susan M. Chehardy, Jude G. Gravois, and Timothy S. Marcel

APPEAL DISMISSED TSM SMC JGG COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT, DERRIE LEE REMO Connie P. Trieu

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE, ROSE MARIE TINDAL NEWSON Robert D. Levenstein MARCEL, J.

In this case arising from a bond for deed signed between the parties, plaintiff

Derrie Lee Remo appeals a May 17, 2023 judgment of the trial court denying an

exception of no cause of action and granting an exception of prematurity filed by

defendant Rose Marie Tindal Newson. For the following reasons, we dismiss this

appeal.

BACKGROUND

On December 9, 2022, Mr. Remo filed a Petition for Breach of Contract and

Rule to Evict Bond for Deed Buyer/Occupant in the 40th Judicial District Court for

the Parish of St. John the Baptist. Allegedly without knowledge of this petition,

Ms. Newson on December 22, 2022 filed a Petition for Damages in the same court

against Mr. Remo arising from the same incident, a dispute over a bond for deed

contract executed between the parties.

In her answer to Mr. Remo’s petition, Ms. Newson requested that the trial

court consolidate the two cases, and also raised a peremptory exception of no cause

of action and a dilatory exception of prematurity. By order on January 19, 2023,

the trial court granted the motion to consolidate and also issued a rule to show

cause as to why the exceptions filed by Ms. Newson should not be granted.

The exceptions were heard by the court on May 3, 2023. Subsequently, the

trial court issued a judgment on May 17, 2023 denying the exception of no cause

of action, but granting the exception of prematurity. Written reasons for judgment

indicate the trial court intended the exception of prematurity to be granted with

respect to Mr. Remo’s claims for breach of contract and for eviction, and state the

exception of no cause of action was denied as moot. Mr. Remo filed an appeal

from this judgment.

1 DISCUSSION

On April 3, 2024, we issued an order to the district court with instructions to

amend its May 17, 2023 judgment to include the appropriate and necessary

decretal language. In that order, we also observed that, in the absence of such

decretal language, this Court could not determine whether the judgment was

interlocutory or a partial final judgment pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B).

On April 12, 2024, the record was supplemented with an amended judgment.

The language of the amended judgment now reads:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Rose Marie Tindal Newson's Exception of No Cause of Action against Derrie Lee Remo is hereby DENIED, and dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Rose Marie Tindal Newson's Exception of Prematurity regarding Derrie Lee Remo's claim of breach of contract and rule for eviction is hereby GRANTED.

The language marked in bold is the only new decretal language.

This Court cannot reach the merits of an appeal unless our jurisdiction has

been properly invoked by a valid final judgment. Input/Output Marine Sys., Inc. v.

Wilson Greatbatch Techs., Inc., 10-477 (La. App. 5 Cir. 10/29/10), 52 So.3d 909,

915. A valid final judgment must contain decretal language, and it must name the

party in favor of whom the ruling is ordered, the party against whom the ruling is

ordered, and the specific relief that is granted or denied. See La. C.C.P. art. 1918;

Morraz-Blandon v. Voiron, 16-112 (La. App. 5 Cir. 8/25/16), 199 So.3d 1220,

1221; Claiborne Medical Corp. v. Siddiqui, 12-759 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2/28/13), 113

So.3d 1109, 1112. The specific relief granted or denied should be determinable

from the judgment itself without reference to an extrinsic source such as pleadings

or reasons for judgment. Id.; Babin v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 11-192

(La. App. 5 Cir. 9/27/11), 76 So.3d 100, 102.

2 The trial court’s amended judgment lacks any certification that it is a partial

final judgment certified for appeal pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B). This

certification is necessary because, even with dismissal of plaintiff's claims, there

remain claims filed by the defendant Ms. Newson in her Petition for Damages (a

separate case that was consolidated with plaintiff's earlier filed case on January 19,

2023.)

Under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B), when a court renders a partial summary

judgment as to one or more but less than all of the claims, demands, issues, or

theories against a party, the judgment shall not constitute a final judgment unless it

is designated as a final judgment by the court after an express determination that

there is no just reason for delay. No such designation has been made here. In the

absence of such a determination and designation, any such order or decision shall

not constitute a final judgment for the purpose of immediate appeal and may be

revised at any time prior to rendition of the judgment adjudicating all the claims

and the rights and liabilities of all the parties. Id.

CONCLUSION

The amended judgment remains deficient as there has been no certification

of the partial final judgment pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B). Accordingly, and

for the foregoing reasons, this appeal is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED

3 SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

SUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ FREDERICKA H. WICKER CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK JUDE G. GRAVOIS MARC E. JOHNSON STEPHEN J. WINDHORST LINDA M. WISEMAN JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. FIRST DEPUTY CLERK SCOTT U. SCHLEGEL TIMOTHY S. MARCEL FIFTH CIRCUIT MELISSA C. LEDET JUDGES 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053) DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF POST OFFICE BOX 489 GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 (504) 376-1400

(504) 376-1498 FAX www.fifthcircuit.org

NOTICE OF JUDGMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE OPINION IN THE BELOW-NUMBERED MATTER HAS BEEN DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 2-16.4 AND 2-16.5 THIS DAY APRIL 24, 2024 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, CLERK OF COURT, COUNSEL OF RECORD AND ALL PARTIES NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:

23-CA-509 E-NOTIFIED 40TH DISTRICT COURT (CLERK) HONORABLE J. STERLING SNOWDY (DISTRICT JUDGE) CONNIE P. TRIEU (APPELLANT) ROBERT D. LEVENSTEIN (APPELLEE)

MAILED