Regions Insurance, Inc. v. Alliance Cab Service, LLC

REGIONS INSURANCE, INC. * NO. 2019-CA-0714

VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL

ALLIANCE CAB SERVICE, * FOURTH CIRCUIT
LLC
* STATE OF LOUISIANA

*

*
*******

CHASE, J., CONCURS WITH REASONS

I agree with the majority’s opinion that Alliance’s adoption of Regions’

material facts precludes Alliance from asserting a genuine issue exists as to

whether the contract was breached and damages were sustained. I write separately

because Alliance also adopted the fact that it owes the amount sought by Regions

in its petition. Specifically, Alliance admits that it “is justly and truly obligated to

Regions, in the principal sum of $95,481.49, plus legal interest from the date the

sums were due until paid, and all costs of this proceeding.”1 I find this admission

to be a judicial confession pursuant to La. C.C. art. 1853, and constitutes full proof

against Alliance that it is indebted to Regions. See also Burks v. Cambeck &

Partners, 2002-0324, p. 4 (La. 10/15/02), 834 So.2d 968, 970.

“A judicial confession is a party’s explicit admission of an adverse factual

element and has the effect of waiving evidence as to the subject of the admission –

of withdrawing the subject matter of the confession from issue.” Cichirillo v.

Avondale Industries, Inc., 2004-2894, p. 6 (La. 11/29/05), 917 So.2d 424, 428-29.

A party making such an admission may withdraw it absent detrimental reliance on

the admission by the opposing party. Yount v. Lafayette Ins. Co., 2008-0380, p. 18

1
Alliance also adopted the affidavit of Godfrey Marine, Jr. attesting to this fact and attached it to
their opposition memorandum.

(La.App. 4 Cir. 1/28/09), 4 So.3d 162, 173; 19 LA. CIV. L. TREATISE,

EVIDENCE AND PROOF § 4.5. Alliance did not withdraw its adoption of

Regions’ material facts. In the fact section of Alliance’s appellate brief, it stated it

“agreed to the material facts at issue in the summary judgment in the trial court”

and listed Regions’ material facts including the fact that Alliance owes Regions the

amount at issue. Accordingly, I agree with the majority’s opinion that the ruling of

the trial court should be affirmed.