Lydia Degueyter v. First American Title Company
Lydia Degueyter v. First American Title Company, 252 So. 3d 475 (La. 2018).
Cited by
- Kenneth Chevis v. Ernesto Rivera and Apache Industrial Services, Incorporated La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
- Daphne Smith v. City Bank & Trust Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
- Smith v. City Bank & Trust Co. 271 So. 3d 263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Penalber v. Blount 550 So. 2d 577
Opinion text
Supreme Court of Louisiana
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE #043
FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
The Opinions handed down on the 18th day of September, 2018, are as follows:
PER CURIAM:
2017-C-2163 LYDIA DEGUEYTER v. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY (Parish of St.
Martin)
Having considered the record, oral argument and briefs of the
parties, we find the court of appeal correctly reversed the
district court’s judgment granting summary judgment in favor of
First American Title Co. However, we find the court of appeal
erred in granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff. See
Penalber v. Blount, 550 So.2d 577 (La. 1989) (explaining that
summary judgment “is rarely appropriate for a determination based
on subjective facts such as intent, motive, malice, knowledge or
good faith.”). Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal
is affirmed in part and reversed in part. The motions for summary
judgment filed by both parties are hereby denied, and the case is
remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
GENOVESE, J., dissents in part and assigns reasons.
09/18/18
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2017-C-2163
LYDIA DEGUEYTER
VERSUS
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL,
THIRD CIRCUIT, PARISH OF ST. MARTIN
PER CURIAM
Having considered the record, oral argument and briefs of the parties, we
find the court of appeal correctly reversed the district court’s judgment granting
summary judgment in favor of First American Title Co. However, we find the
court of appeal erred in granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff. See
Penalber v. Blount, 550 So.2d 577 (La. 1989) (explaining that summary judgment
“is rarely appropriate for a determination based on subjective facts such as intent,
motive, malice, knowledge or good faith.”). Accordingly, the judgment of the
court of appeal is affirmed in part and reversed in part. The motions for summary
judgment filed by both parties are hereby denied, and the case is remanded to the
district court for further proceedings.
1
09/18/18
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2017-C-2163
LYDIA DEGUEYTER
VERSUS
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL,
THIRD CIRCUIT, PARISH OF ST. MARTIN
GENOVESE, J., dissenting in part.
I agree with the majority that the court of appeal erred in granting summary
judgment in favor of Linda Degueyter. However, I disagree with the majority that
the court of appeal correctly reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in
favor of First American Title Company (First American).
Resolution of First American’s motion for summary judgment requires an
interpretation and application of its owner’s title insurance policy. First American’s
motion for summary judgment does not, as the majority concludes, require a
determination of “subjective facts such as intent, motive, malice, knowledge or good
faith.” Penalber v. Blount, 550 So.2d 577, 583 (La.1989). Rather, summary
judgment in favor of First American is appropriate because there are no genuine
issues of material fact as to the lack of coverage in favor of Degueyter under the title
insurance policy, and the insurer is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. La.Code
Civ.P. art. 966. For these reasons, I find the court of appeal erred in reversing the
trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of First American.
Accordingly, I respectfully dissent in part.