Weldon Vitto, Sr. v. Home Bank

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: January 28, 2009
• Docket: CA-0008-0758
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

CA 08-758

WELDON VITTO, SR.

VERSUS

HOME BANK, ET AL.

**********

APPEAL FROM THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. C-20073999 HONORABLE MARILYN CARR CASTLE, DISTRICT JUDGE

JOHN D. SAUNDERS JUDGE

Court composed of John D. Saunders, Billy Howard Ezell, and J. David Painter, Judges.

AFFIRMED.

Kenneth Warren DeJean Attorney at Law P. O. Box 4325 Lafayette, LA 70502 (337) 235-5294 Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant: Weldon Vitto, Sr.

Joseph C. Giglio, Jr. Liskow & Lewis P. O. Box 52008 Lafayette, LA 70505-2008 (337) 232-7424 Counsel for Defendant/Appellee: Home Bank Richard Joseph Petre, Jr. Onebane Law Firm P. O. Drawer 3507 Lafayette, La 70502-3507 (337) 237-2660 Counsel for Defendant/Appellee: Clarendon America Insurance Co. SAUNDERS, Judge.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY:

Weldon Vitto, Sr. (hereinafter “Mr. Vitto”) appeals, for a second time, the

Fifteenth Judicial District Court’s grant of an exception of res judicata and dismissal

of his suit against Clarendon American Insurance Company (hereinafter

“Clarendon”). It appears that, as far as Clarendon is concerned, Mr. Vitto filed

identical suits in the same trial court and received the same decision from two

different judges in that court. In his first and second suit, case numbers 20073997 and

20073999-L, respectively, Mr. Vitto sued Clarendon and was dismissed after Judges

Trahan and Castle granted Clarendon’s exception of res judicata. Judge Trahan’s

decision, has already been appealed to and decided by this court in Vitto v. Davis,

2008-401 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/1/08), 2008 WL 4414519 (La.App. 3 Cir.).

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR:

1. Did the trial court err in granting Clarendon’s exception of res judicata?

This case is identical to that already ruled on by this court in Vitto v. Davis

2008-401 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/1/08), 2008 WL 4414519 (La.App. 3 Cir.). It involves

the same: facts, relevant parties, and assignment of error. For the reasons cited in

Vitto, we affirm the ruling of the trial court.

CONCLUSION:

For the above-stated reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court in all

respects. All costs are to be assessed to appellant, Weldon Vitto, Sr.