Junior Moore Brown v. Stratis Construction, LLC and Carl Andrew Perkins

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: March 7, 2022
• Docket: 2021CA0964
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST CIRCUIT

2021 CA 0964

JUNIOR MOORE BROWN

VERSUS

STRATIS CONSTRUCTION, LLC AND CARL ANDREW PERKINS

Judgment Rendered: MAR 0 7 2022

On Appeal from the

CIA Office of Workers' Compensation Administration, District 6 In and for the Parish of St. Tammany State of Louisiana

C No. 18- 06608

The Honorable R. Myles Donahue, Judge Presiding

Michael W. Whitehead Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee Covington, Louisiana Junior Moore Brown

Ben E. Clayton Attorneys for Defendants/ Appellants Joshua P. Clayton Stratis Construction, LLC and Slidell, Louisiana Carl Andrew Perkins

BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C. J., PENZATO, AND RESTER, JJ. PENZATO, J.

Stratis Construction, LLC and Carl Perkins appeal from a default judgment

rendered against them in a workers' compensation proceeding. For the following

reasons, we vacate and set aside the preliminary default and confirmation of default

judgments and remand for further proceedings.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On September 28, 2018, Junior Moore Brown filed a disputed claim for

compensation with the Office of Workers' Compensation ( OWC) against Stratis

Construction, LLC ( Stratis),' alleging that he suffered a disabling work-related

injury necessitating medical treatment. Brown requested citation and service be

made by certified mail at 70325 Hwy. 1077, Ste. 300, Covington, LA 70433 ( 70325

Hwy. 1077 address). On June 18, 2019, Brown amended his disputed claim for

compensation against Stratis and added Carl Perkins as a defendant. Brown

requested citation and service of the amended disputed claim be made on both

defendants at the 70325 Hwy. 1077 address.

Subsequently, Brown sought a preliminary default against both defendants,

which the OWC granted on October 23, 2019. In the motion for preliminary default,

Brown asserted that service of the original claim was perfected on Stratis and that

service of the amended claim was perfected on both defendants. The OWC

confirmed the default judgment on April 28, 2021, awarding Brown certain

indemnity benefits and " all reasonable and necessary medical benefits for treatment

necessitated by this accident." On May 24, 2021, defendants filed a petition to annul

the default judgment, alleging that neither defendant had ever been served with

Brown' s claim. On the same date, defendants filed a motion for suspensive appeal.

1 Brown misspelled Stratis as " Stratus" in the original claim, which he corrected in an amended claim.

2 After the instant appeal was lodged, this court issued a Rule to Show Cause

Order on the following issues: ( 1) whether the judgment described the relief with

sufficient particularity with regard to the medical expenses; and ( 2) whether the

appeal was premature given the outstanding petition seeking to annul the default

judgment. ( Rule to Show Cause Order). Following the issuance of the Rule to Show

Cause Order, Brown filed a motion to supplement the appellate record, requesting

that this court order the OWC to supplement the record with the service information

pursuant to the Uniform Rules— Courts of Appeal, Rule 2- 1. 11. 2 This court denied

the motion to supplement the appellate record, determining that pursuant to La.

C. C. P. arts. 2132 and 2088( A)( 4), the request was more properly directed to the trial

court. Subsequently, the OWC signed a consent judgment supplementing the

appellate record with the " purported citations and returns for service" of the original

and amended claims on Stratis and Perkins.

We first address whether this appeal is premature given the outstanding

petition for nullity. Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 2005 provides, in

pertinent part, that "[ a] n action for nullity does not affect the right to appeal."

Moreover, this court has recognized that " an action of nullity of a final judgment is

a separate remedy independent of all other actions for judicial relief, and may be

availed of notwithstanding the right of appeal and without adverse effect upon one' s

right of appeal." Schoen v. Burns, 321 So. 2d 908, 913 ( La. App. 1 st Cir. 1975). An

action to annul a judgment for a vice of form may be brought by an interested person

at any time, before any court, and through a collateral proceeding. See La. C. C. P.

art. 2002( B); Edwards v. First Bank & Trust, 2012- 0423 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 4/ 8/ 13),

181 So. 3d 726, 729. A party may avail himself of the right to seek annulment of a

2 Uniform Rules— Courts of Appeal, Rule 2- 1. 11 provides:

Subpoenas, notices, and returns may be omitted from the record, unless they are at issue.Such items may be supplied upon timely application to this court by any party, upon showing their materiality. 3 judgment despite the fact that the party has a right to appeal and without adversely

affecting the right to appeal. See La. C. C. P. art. 2005; Edwards, 181 So. 3d at 729.

See also Roach v. Pearl, 95- 1573 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 5/ 10/ 96), 673 So. 2d 691, 694-

95 ("[ Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article] 2005 specifically allows for a

nullity action while an appeal is pending.") Further, Roach recognized that the

nullity action could be brought in the same suit without distinguishing whether the

nullity sought was relative or absolute. Given the foregoing, the appeal is not

premature despite a nullity action being filed in the underlying OWC proceedings.

Therefore, we maintain this appeal.

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Defendants assert two assignments of error: ( 1) that the OWC erred by

rendering a default judgment against them because they never were served with

citation or the claim prior to the entry of the default judgment; and ( 2) that the OWC

erred because Brown did not make a prima facie showing that his alleged accident

arose out of the course and scope of his employment with defendants.

APPLICABLE LAW

Sufficiency of Service

In reviewing default judgments, the appellate court is restricted to determining

the sufficiency of the evidence offered in support of the judgment. This

determination is a factual one governed by the manifest error standard of review.

Arias v. Stolthaven New Orleans, L.L. C., 2008- 1111 ( La. 5/ 5/ 09), 9 So. 3d 815, 818.

Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1201( A) provides that "[ c] itation

and service thereof are essential in all civil actions except summary and executory

proceedings, divorce actions under Civil Code Article 102, and proceedings under

the Children' s Code. Without them allproceedings are absolutely null." ( Emphasis

added.); Pope v. Roberts, 2013- 1407 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 4/ 16/ 14), 144 So. 3d 1059,

1063.

Cl The record before us reflects that the citations for both the original and

amended claims were addressed to the 70325 Hwy. 1077 address. The records of

the Louisiana Secretary of State evidence that the mailing address, registered office

address, and domiciliary address of Stratis is 728 N. Theard Street, Covington,

Louisiana, 70433 ( 728 N. Theard Street address), and that Perkins is the registered

agent for service of process for Stratis. 3

The motion and order for preliminary default did not identify the individuals

who were served with either the original or amended claim and did not specify the

alleged form of service. The supplemented evidence reflects one certified mail

receipt directed to Stratis at the 70325 Hwy. 1077 address and signed by " Candice

Simm." A second certified mail receipt directed to Perkins at the 70325 Hwy. 1077

address is signed by " A. Roderfeld." Two other certified mail receipts directed to

Stratis and Perkins at the 70325 Hwy. 1077 address are both signed by " A.

Roderfeld." At the hearing on the confirmation of preliminary default, the OWC

requested whether Brown knew the identity of "A. Roderfeld" or " Candice Simm," 4

but Brown admitted he did not know either person. There is no evidence in the

record that " Candice Simm" or " A. Roderfeld" was authorized to receive service on

behalf of either Stratis or Perkins.

Defendants assert that even with the certified mail receipts, service was not

proper upon the defendants pursuant to La. R.S. 23: 1310. 3( B), which permits service

3 The records of the Louisiana Secretary of State can be found at www.sos. la.gov. We take judicial notice herein of the Secretary of State' s official governmental website. See Welch v. Planning & Zoning Commission of East Baton Rouge Parish, 2016- 0253 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 4/ 26/ 17), 220 So. 3d 60, 68 n.9 ( taking judicial notice of Secretary of State' s official governmental website); State v. Carpenter, 2000- 436 ( La. App. 3rd Cir. 10/ 18/ 00), 772 So. 2d 200, 206, writ denied, 2000- 3152 La. 1/ 25/ 02), 806 So. 2d 665; see also Phi Iota Alpha Fraternity, Inc. v. Schedler, 2014- 1620 ( La. App. 1 st Cir. 9/ 21/ 15), 182 So. 3d 998, 1003 ( taking judicial notice of the information maintained on the United States Patent and Trademark Office' s website).

4 The record reflects the spelling of " Candice Simm" as " Candace Simm." However, the supplemented evidence reveals that the certified mail receipt was signed as " Candice Simm."

Therefore, we will use the spelling on the certified mail receipt. R of a workers' compensation claim by certified mail or any other manner provided by

law. Louisiana Revised Statute 23: 1316 provides:'

If a defendant in the principal or incidental demand fails to answer or file other pleadings within the time prescribed by law or the time extended by the workers' compensation judge, and upon proof of proper service having been made, preliminary default may be entered against him. The preliminary default shall be obtained by written motion. [ Emphasis added.]

With regard to a limited liability company, service is required to have been

made by certified mail at the registered address. See Jefferson Parish Hospital

Service District No. 2 v. K & W Diners, LLC, 2010- 767 ( La. App. 5th Cir. 4/ 12/ 11),

65 So. 3d 6621 667. There is no evidence in the record that Stratis was served at its

registered address, the 728 N. Theard Street address. We further note that there is

no evidence in the record that either " Candice Simm" or " A. Roderfeld" was

authorized to accept service on behalf of Stratis. See Brigandi v. Egana, 2001- 176

La. App. 5th Cir. 5/ 30/ 01), 788 So. 2d 680, 681- 82 ( finding default judgment

absolutely null because the return of service failed to indicate the capacity of the

person receiving service).

Brown asserts that at the time of service of the original claim in 2018 and the

amended claim in 2019, Stratis' s registered address was the 70325 Hwy. 1077

address. However, there is nothing in the record to support this assertion. The

Louisiana Secretary of State lists the 728 N. Theard Street address and the date of

registration as March 3, 2015. There is nothing showing any other address ever

registered to Stratis. Brown relies on Andre v. Construction Material Shop, 93- 1212

La. App. 1st Cir. 3/ 11/ 94), 633 So. 2d 1313, 1317, for the proposition that service

may be made on an employer/ defendant at its business address, even if not on the

registered agent for service of process. However, K& W Diners distinguished Andre

and recognized that even if service of process is made properly pursuant to La. R.S.

5 Louisiana Revised Statute 23: 1316 was recently repealed by Acts 2021, No. 174, § 6, effective January 1, 2022. Ce 23: 1310. 3( B) by certified mail, it must also be on the proper person. K& W Diners,

65 So. 3d at 667. The court in K& W Diners annulled the default judgment because

service was not made at the registered address of an employer. K& W Diners, 65 So.

3d at 669. Brown asserts that the 70325 Hwy. 1077 address is the business address

and was the registered address of Stratis at the time of service; argument of counsel

and briefs, no matter how artful, are not evidence. Seale & Ross, P.L. C. v. Holder,

2019- 1487 ( La. App. Ist Cir. 8/ 3/ 20), 310 So. 3d 195, 204. Therefore, the service

of process upon Stratis is insufficient.

Brown also maintains that citation and service upon Perkins was appropriate,

alleging that Perkins is a licensed practicing attorney in the State of Louisiana with

the Louisiana State Bar Association listing his principal place of business as the

70325 Hwy. 1077 address. As we stated above, even if service of process is made

properly pursuant to La. R.S. 23: 1310. 3( B) by certified mail, it must also be on the

proper person. K& W Diners, 65 So. 3d at 667.

There is no evidence in the record that Perkins was served personally. Brown

offers no authority for the proposition that service of an individual at an address

listed with the Louisiana State Bar Association is sufficient under the circumstances

herein. Furthermore, there is no evidence in the record that Perkins is an attorney or

establishing the location of his business address.6 Therefore, the purported service

upon Perkins is insufficient.

Absolute Nullity of Default Judgment

A final judgment may be annulled for either vices of form or substance. La.

C. C. P. art. 2001. Judgments suffering from vices of form are called " absolute

nullities," while those which contain vices of substance are called " relative

6 Even if we were to assume that the Louisiana State Bar Association website is a government website and accept that the 70325 Hwy. 1077 address is the business address of Perkins, there is no evidence in the record that Perkins was served personally or that either " Candice Simm" or " A. Roderfeld" had authority to accept service for Perkins. 7 nullities." Rivet v. Regions Bank, 2002- 1813 ( La. 2/ 25/ 03), 838 So. 2d 1290, 1293.

A default judgment confirmed against one whom a valid preliminary default has not

been taken is an absolute nullity. La. C. C. P. art. 2002. Absolute nullities may be

attacked collaterally, at any time, by rule, or any other method. C. C. P. art. 2002;

Rivet, 838 So. 2d at 1293.

It is well settled that a default judgment may not be taken against a person

who has not received citation and service thereof. Ware v. Foremost Insurance Co.,

2016- 1481 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 6/ 2/ 17), 223 So. 3d 1, 3 ( citing Clay v. Clay, 389 So.

2d 31, 35- 36 ( La. 1979)). A judgment rendered against a defendant who has not

been served with process as required by law is an absolute nullity. See La. C. C. P.

arts. 1201( A) and 2002( A)(2); Edwards, 181 So. 3d at 729. In the absence of

evidence of proper citation and service of process informing the defendant of the

claim against him, in strict compliance of the law, all subsequent proceedings are

absolutely null. Rivers v. Groth Corporation, 95- 2509 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 9/ 27/ 96),

680 So. 2d 7629 763.

The evidence reflects that service was not made on Perkins personally and

that the purported service to Stratis was sent by certified mail to an address not listed

as the registered address for Stratis with the Louisiana Secretary of State. We

acknowledge that service on an attorney, as a representative of a client, is proper

when the attorney' s secretary is served in the attorney' s office. La. C. C. P. art.

1235( B); Edwards, 181 So. 3d at 729. However, there is no indication in the record

as to the capacities of "Candice Simm" and " A. Roderfeld" or that either individual

was authorized to accept service for either Stratis or Perkins. As we have determined

that the certified mail receipts signed by " Candice Simm" and " A. Roderfeld" were

insufficient service of process upon the defendants, we find that the default judgment

entered in this case is an absolute nullity and we reverse it. This case is remanded

for further proceedings. As we have found that the judgment is an absolute nullity, we pretermit any

discussion referred to in the Rule to Show Cause as to the language therein not

setting forth the medical expenses with any certainty. Furthermore, we also

pretermit any discussion as to defendants' second assignment of error that Brown

failed to make aprima facie showing that his alleged accident arose out of the course

and scope of his employment with Perkins.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, we vacate the October 23, 2019 preliminary

default and April 28, 2021 confirmation of default judgments of the Office of

Workers' Compensation rendered against Stratis Construction, LLC and Carl

Perkins, and in favor of Junior Moore Brown. This matter is remanded to the Office

of Workers' Compensation for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. All

costs of this appeal are assessed against plaintiff/appellee, Junior Moore Brown.

APPEAL MAINTAINED; OCTOBER 23, 2019 JUDGMENT OF PRELIMINARY DEFAULT AND APRIL 28, 2021 JUDGMENT CONFIRMING DEFAULT VACATED; CASE REMANDED.