Martha Green, George Green, and the Estate of Martha Green Versus Maison Insurance Company and Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedSeptember 4, 2024
Docket24-C-297
StatusUnknown

This text of Martha Green, George Green, and the Estate of Martha Green Versus Maison Insurance Company and Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (Martha Green, George Green, and the Estate of Martha Green Versus Maison Insurance Company and Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association) 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
Martha Green, George Green, and the Estate of Martha Green Versus Maison Insurance Company and Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association, (La. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

MARTHA GREEN, GEORGE GREEN, AND NO. 24-C-297 THE ESTATE OF MARTHA GREEN FIFTH CIRCUIT VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL MAISON INSURANCE COMPANY AND LOUISIANA INSURANCE GUARANTY STATE OF LOUISIANA ASSOCIATION

ON APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY REVIEW FROM THE FORTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST, STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 80,620, DIVISION "A" HONORABLE VERCELL FIFFIE, JUDGE PRESIDING

September 04, 2024

JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. JUDGE

Panel composed of Judges Stephen J. Windhorst, John J. Molaison, Jr., and Amanda L. Calogero, Pro Tempore

WRIT GRANTED; JUDGMENT DENYING EXCEPTION OF PRESCRIPTION REVERSED; EXCEPTION OF PRESCRIPTION GRANTED; PETITION DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE JJM SJW ALC COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT, MARTHA GREEN, ET AL Zachary Delerno Charles L. Gowland, Jr.

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RELATOR, LOUISIANA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION Sidney W. Degan, III Genevieve K. Jacques Paul R. Wegmann Alina Pagani Travis L. Bourgeois Candace C. Chauvin MOLAISON, J.

The relator, Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (“LIGA”), seeks a

review of the April 30, 2024 judgment that denied its Exception of Prescription.

For the following reasons, we grant this writ application, reverse the trial court

ruling, grant the exception of prescription, and dismiss the plaintiffs’ petition with

prejudice.

Law and Discussion

On August 28, 2023, the plaintiffs, Martha Green, George Green, and the

estate of Martha Green (“the Greens”), filed a petition for damages against Maison

Insurance Company (“Maison”). The petition alleged that Maison provided

property insurance to their property and that their property sustained damage

caused by Hurricane Ida. On November 21, 2023, the Greens filed a First

Amended Petition for Damages, adding LIGA as a defendant.

LIGA answered the petition and filed an exception for prescription, among

other things. The trial court denied the exception after the April 30, 2024 hearing.

An exception of prescription is a type of peremptory exception. The

function of the peremptory exception is to have the plaintiff’s action declared

legally nonexistent or barred by the effect of law; this exception tends to dismiss or

defeat the action. Ruffins v. HAZA Foods of Louisiana, LLC, 21-619 (La. App. 5

Cir. 5/25/22), 341 So.3d 1259, 1262. The party asserting an exception of

prescription has the burden of proof; however, where the petition shows on its face

that it is prescribed, the burden shifts to the opposing party to prove the

prescriptive period has been interrupted or suspended. McClellan v. Premier

Nissan, L.L.C., 14-726 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2/11/15), 167 So.3d 934, 935. The

standard of review of a trial court’s ruling on a peremptory exception of

prescription is determined by whether evidence is introduced. Wells Fargo

Financial Louisiana, Inc. v. Galloway, 17-0413 (La. App. 4 Cir. 11/15/17), 231

24-C-297 1 So.3d 793, 800. If evidence is not introduced, appellate courts review judgments

sustaining an exception of prescription de novo. DeFelice v. Federated Nat’l Ins.

Co., 18-374 (La. App. 5 Cir. 7/9/19), 279 So.3d 422, 426. However, when

evidence is introduced at a hearing on an exception of prescription, the trial court’s

findings of fact are reviewed under the manifest error standard. Id.

The transcript of the hearing on the exception of prescription is included in

this writ application. The transcript indicates that evidence was not introduced at

the hearing, so we will review this matter de novo.

Hurricane Ida made landfall in Louisiana on August 29, 2021. The deadline

for filing all lawsuits for damage caused by Hurricane Ida was August 29, 2023.

La. R.S. 22:868. The Greens filed a Petition for Damages against Maison on

August 28, 2023. Maison was declared insolvent on September 27, 2022.1 The

original petition filed by the Greens does not mention Maison’s insolvency or

LIGA. This petition was served on Maison through the Louisiana Secretary of

State. The Greens did not request that LIGA or Maison’s receiver be served.

The Greens filed a First Amended Petition for Damages naming LIGA as an

additional defendant on November 21, 2023. Service of the First Amended

Petition for Damages was requested on LIGA through its registered agent. Service

of the original petition was not requested on LIGA.

Generally, according to La. C.C.P. articles 3462 and 3464, prescription is

interrupted by filing a suit or acknowledgment. Prescription runs against all

persons unless there is a legislative exception. La. C.C.P. art. 3467. The failure to

file suit on time bars the action. La. C.C. art. 3447.

The prescriptive period for a property owner to file a suit against its property

insurer for property damage arising from a named storm under a Louisiana

1 On August 11, 2022, Maison merged with FedNat Insurance Company and on September 27, 2022, pursuant to an order issued by the Second Judicial Circuit Court for Leon County, Florida, FedNat was declared insolvent. Chatman v. Maison Ins. Co., 22-01055, 2024 WL 347889, (M.D. La. Jan. 30, 2024).

24-C-297 2 insurance policy is two years. La. R.S. 22:868. No legislative exception exists to

the prescriptive period in suits against an insolvent insurer. La. R.S. 22:2068,

which requires an automatic stay of 180 days in proceedings against insolvent

insurers, is not a prohibition on filing a suit but rather a stay of certain proceedings.

It does not interrupt or suspend prescription against an insolvent insurer. Grelle v.

Youngblood, 94-397 (La. App. 4 Cir. 4/14/94) 635 So.2d 1291, 1292.

The First Amended Petition for Damages filed against LIGA is prescribed

on its face. Hence, the Greens have the burden of proving that prescription was

interrupted or suspended. The Greens argued that the timely original petition

against Maison relates back to the First Amended Petition for Damages filed

against LIGA.

The Greens’ original petition was filed against Maison, which had been

declared insolvent. Maison ceased to exist upon entry of the Order of Liquidation

on September 27, 2022, almost a year before the filing of the original petition. See

Tyburczy v. Graham, 91-1978, 1994 WL 150724, (E.D. La. Mar. 30, 1994)

(“When an insurer such as Alliance becomes insolvent, it ceases to exist, and the

liquidator or receiver becomes its legal successor, not LIGA.”). La. C.C.P. art.

740. See also Stephanie Laborde, et al., The DEF’s of LIGA: An Update to the

ABC’s of LIGA, 77 La. L. Rev. 997 (2017), at 1001 (“When a court of competent

jurisdiction declares an insurer insolvent, the insurer effectively ceases to exist. A

new entity arises – the insurer in liquidation or receivership. This new entity, rather

than LIGA, is the insolvent insurer’s legal successor.”) Hence, prescription was

not interrupted by filing a suit against the nonexistent defendant, Maison. In

addition, service of the original petition was not requested upon LIGA or the

receiver.

Because an insolvent insurer no longer exists, it cannot be a solidary obligor

with LIGA. See, Tyburczy, supra. Thus, LIGA is not a solidary obligor of

24-C-297 3 Maison. LIGA is an entity created by the legislature with specific statutory

mandates; claims against LIGA are limited to “covered claims” under La. R.S.

22:2055(6). Any claim outside the scope of coverage under the LIGA statutes or

that exceeds the powers and duties of LIGA is not a covered claim. It follows that

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

Related

Rizer v. American Sur. & Fid. Ins. Co.
669 So. 2d 387 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1996)
Slaughter v. Slaughter
1 So. 3d 788 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)
McClellan v. Premier Nissan, L.L.C.
167 So. 3d 934 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2015)
Grelle v. Youngblood
635 So. 2d 1291 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Martha Green, George Green, and the Estate of Martha Green Versus Maison Insurance Company and Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martha-green-george-green-and-the-estate-of-martha-green-versus-maison-lactapp-2024.