Donald T. Brown, DDS v. Douglas D. McGinity, McGinity Law Firm, LLC and Hannah Chokr

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: July 14, 2022
• Docket: 2021CA1406
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST CIRCUIT

2021 CA 1406

DONALD T. BROWN, DDS 0N L VERSUS

DOUGLAS D. McGINITY, McGINITY LAW FIRM, LLC AND HANNAH CHOKR

Judgment Rendered. FJUL 14 2022

Appealed from the 22nd Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of St. Tammany State of Louisiana Case No. 2016- 13910

The Honorable Ellen M. Creel, Judge Presiding

Thomas H. Huval Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee Stefini W. Salles Donald T. Brown, DDS Covington, Louisiana and

Neil H. Mixon Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Kevin R. Tully Counsel for Defendant/Appellants H. Carter Marshall Douglas D. McGinity and McGinity Law New Orleans, Louisiana Firm, LLC

BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C. J., LANIER, AND HESTER, JJ. LANIER, J.

This case arises out of a suit on an open account filed by plaintiff, Donald T.

Brown, D. D. S., against defendants, Douglas D. McGinity and McGinity Law Firm,

LLC ( hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to as " McGinity"), and Nisrine

Chokr, the mother of Zienab Chokr, a/ k/ a Zara Chokr, a minor who was injured in

an automobile accident. Dr. Brown alleged that following his treatment of Zara,

McGinity and Ms. Chokr failed to pay the $ 3, 777. 00 balance due and owing on

Zara' s account. Cross motions for summary judgment were filed by the parties and

heard by the district court on November 5, 2020.

In a companion appeal, Brown v. McGinity, 2021- 1405 ( La. App. 1 Cir.

22), So. 3d Brown I), this court affirmed the district court' s

December 30, 2020 judgment granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff,

Donald T. Brown, D.D. S. and against Nisrine Chokr, Douglas D. McGinity, and

McGinity Law Firm, LLC, jointly, severally, and in solido in the amount of

3, 777. 00, plus court costs, interest, and reasonable attorney fees. In the instant

appeal, McGinity seeks review of the district court's December 30, 2020 judgment

denying McGinity' s motion for summary judgment, which the district court

certified as a final judgment pursuant to La. Code Civ. P. art. 1915.

Pursuant to La. Code Civ. P. art. 968, no appeal lies from the denial of a

motion for summary judgment. The denial of a motion for summary judgment is

an interlocutory judgment and is not appealable absent a showing of irreparable

injury. Ascension School Employees Credit Union v. Provost Salter Harper &

Alford, L.L.C., 2006- 0992 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 3/ 23/ 07), 960 So. 2d 939, 940. The

district court' s certification that the December 30, 2020 judgment denying

McGinity's motion for summary judgment was final and appealable was

ineffectual. There is no authority for the certification of a judgment denying a

motion for summary judgment as final. La. Code Civ. P. art. 968; La. Code Civ. P.

2 art. 1915; Belanger v. Gabriel Chemicals, Inc., 2000- 0747 ( La. App. 1 Cir.

5/ 23/ 01), 787 So. 2d 559, 563, writ denied, 2001- 2289 ( La. 11/ 16/ 01), 802 So. 2d

612. Nonetheless, because we have already concluded in Brown I that the

summary judgment granted in favor of Dr. Brown was warranted and that

McGinity owes $ 3, 777. 00 on the open account, we dismiss this appeal as moot.

We assess all costs associated with this appeal against appellants, Douglas D.

McGinity, and McGinity Law Firm, LLC.

APPEAL DISMISSED.