Williams v. Orleans Levee District

31 So. 3d 1048, 2010 WL 1302918
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedApril 5, 2010
Docket2009-C-2637
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 31 So. 3d 1048 (Williams v. Orleans Levee District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Williams v. Orleans Levee District, 31 So. 3d 1048, 2010 WL 1302918 (La. 2010).

Opinion

*1049 ORDER

|,WRIT GRANTED. The decision of this Court in Forum, for Equality PAC v. McKeithen, 04-2551 (La.1/19/05), 893 So.2cl 738, is controlling. In Forum for Equality, this Court held that the preclu-sive effect of an earlier judgment could bind a nonparty plaintiff whose interests were adequately represented by parties to the prior litigation. The Court found no error in the district court ruling granting the defendants’ exception of res judicata as to the plaintiffs’ claim that the September 18, 2004 election was not a statewide election because that issue had been previously litigated by different plaintiffs in a case that was now final.

The lower courts’ view that the Forum for Equality case was not applicable in this case, overlooked the critical fact that the preclusive effect of the previous judgment is not being used against a nonparty to the litigation. The respondent is not being precluded from contesting a matter that he has not had full and fair opportunity to litigate. To the contrary, the respondent was a party to the litigation in which it was determined that he was fired for cause. Williams v. Orleans Levee District, Bd. of Com’rs., 00-0297 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/28/01), 784 So.2d 657. The principle of issue preclusion is being applied in this case as intended, to protect |2against “the expense and vexation attending multiple lawsuits, conserv[e] judicial resources, and foste[r] reliance on judicial action by minimizing the possibility of inconsistent decisions.” Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880, 128 S.Ct. 2161, 2171, 171 L.Ed.2d 155 (2008) (citation omitted).

Accordingly, we find the lower courts erred in denying relator’s exception of res judicata insofar 'as it applied to claims raised against it that were resolved by the First Circuit litigation which determined that respondent was lawfully terminated for insubordination. Williams v. Orleans Levee District, Bd. of Com’rs., 00-0297 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/28/01), 784 So.2d 657. The trial court judgment denying relator’s exception of res jtidicata is reversed, as is the court of appeal decision affirming that ruling, and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein.

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

Related

Odeh v. Butler
Fifth Circuit, 2025
Morales v. New Orleans City
Fifth Circuit, 2024
Kelly Michelle Bell v. Roy Paul Joseph, III
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2023
Williams v. SIF Consultants of Louisiana, Inc.
209 So. 3d 903 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)
Pike v. Office of Alcohol & Tobacco Control
157 F. Supp. 3d 523 (M.D. Louisiana, 2015)
Floyd Donley, Sr. v. Hudsons Salvage, L.L.C., et a
517 F. App'x 216 (Fifth Circuit, 2013)
Myers v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.
43 So. 3d 207 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 So. 3d 1048, 2010 WL 1302918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-orleans-levee-district-la-2010.