Zepporiah Edmonds v. Department of Public Works

ZEPPORIAH EDMONDS * NO. 2020-CA-0160

VERSUS *
COURT OF APPEAL
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC *
WORKS FOURTH CIRCUIT
*
STATE OF LOUISIANA
*******

APPEAL FROM
CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ORLEANS
NO. 8444, 8467 & 8485

******
Judge Daniel L. Dysart
******
(Court composed of Judge Terri F. Love, Judge Daniel L. Dysart, Judge Sandra
Cabrina Jenkins)

Brett J. Prendergast
4603 South Carrollton Avenue
New Orleans, LA 70119

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE

Elizabeth Robins
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
1300 Perdido Street
Suite 5E03
New Orleans, LA 70112

Corwin M. St. Raymond
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
1300 Perdido Street
Room 5E03
New Orleans, LA 70112

William R. H. Goforth
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
1300 Perdidio Street
Room 5E03
New Orleans, LA 70112

Donesia D. Turner
SENIOR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
1300 Perdido Street
Room 5E03
New Orleans, LA 70112

Sunni J. LeBeouf
CITY ATTORNEY
1300 Perdido Street
Room 5E03
New Orleans, LA 70112

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

APPEAL DISMISSED
DECEMBER 1, 2021

DLD
TFL This appeal1 seeks review of an October 4, 2019 entry of the City of New
SCJ
Orleans Civil Service Commission (Commission), requiring the appellant, the City

of New Orleans Department of Public Works (DPW), to comply with the

Commission’s order2 (March 20, 2019) and reinstate the appellee, Zepporiah

“Edmonds to her position with all authority and responsivity (sic) including towing

. . .”

However, an appellate court cannot determine the merits of an appeal unless

its jurisdiction is properly invoked by a valid final judgment. Bd. of Supervisors of

La. State Univ. and Agric. and Mech. College v. Mid City Holdings, L.L.C., 15-

0506, p. 2 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/14), 151 So.3d 908, 910.

In the aforementioned case, this Court discussed the elements necessary for

a final judgment, noting:

“A judgment is the determination of the rights of the parties in an
action and may award any relief to which the parties are entitled.” La.
C.C.P. art. 1841. “A valid judgment must be precise, definite, and

1
For further background and history of this case, one may wish to consult this Court’s opinion in
Edmonds v. Dept. of Public Works, 2018-0203 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/5/18), 260 So.3d 784.
2
All decisions of the Commission are considered final on the date of issuance unless an
application for rehearing is filed. Civil Service Rule II, Section 4.18. The deadline to appeal a
decision of the Commission to this Court is thirty (30) days after the decision becomes final.
Civil Service Rule II, Section 4.20. The DPW failed to apply for a rehearing relative to the
March 20, 2019 order/judgment. The DPW likewise failed to take a timely appeal to this Court
from the March 20, 2019 order/judgment.

1

certain. . . The decree alone indicates the decision. . . The result
decree must be spelled out in lucid, unmistakable language. . . . The
quality of definiteness is essential to a proper judgment.”
Input/Output Marine [Sys., Inc. v. Wilson Greatbatch, Tech. Inc.], 10-
477, pp. 12-13, [(La.App. 5 Cir. 10/29/10),] 52 So.3d [909] at 915-16
(citations omitted).
“A final judgment shall be identified as such by appropriate
language.” La. C.C.P. art. 1918. “ ‘A final appealable judgment must
contain decretal language, and it must name the party in favor of
whom the ruling is ordered, the party against whom the ruling is
ordered and the relief that is granted or denied.’ ” Palumbo v. Shapiro,
11-0769, p. 5 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/14/11), 81 So.3d 923, 927, quoting
Input/Output Marine, 10-477, p. 13; 52 So.3d at 916.

The entry issued by the Commission on October 4, 2019, provides the

following:

This matter came before the Commission via petition to address
the Commission filed by Ms. Edmonds requesting enforcement of the
Commission’s previous order that the Department of Public Works
(“DPW”) fully restore Ms. Edmonds to the position of parking
administrator with all the authority and job responsibilities of the
position. Ms. Edmonds informed the Commission that DPW had
carved out certain aspects of her position most notably the towing
responsibilities and reassigned them to her subordinate Enrico
Sterling. DPW acknowledged that Mr. Sterling was overseeing the
towing aspects of the Parking Division and that he was not reporting
to Ms. Edmonds. The Commission was informed for the first time by
the Deputy Director of the Department that the DPW was seeking an
additional Parking Administrator position through Civil Service Rule
VI, Section 2.1. However, the request for an additional position was
only recently submitted to the Department of Civil Service for review.
DPW assured the Commission that it would fully comply with the
Commission’s order and reinstate Ms. Edmonds to her position with
all authority responsivity (sic) including towing pending DPW’s
request for an additional parking administrator position.
In issuing its ruling, the Commission emphasized that DPW
must fully comply with its order immediately or face potential
sanctions.

The above is obviously not a final judgment. It contains no decretal

language. Via this entry, the Commission did not order the DPW to do anything.

Rather, the Commission accepted the assurance of the DPW that it would comply

with the Commission’s previous order (March 20, 2019), which Ms. Edmonds had

2

come before the Commission to address. The Commission emphasized that the

DPW must fully comply with that order or face potential sanctions. The DPW did

not appeal the Commission’s March 20, 2019 order/judgment.

As stated above, the October 4, 2019 entry by the Civil Service Commission

is not a final judgment and as such this Court has no jurisdiction to review the

entry. Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the above captioned and numbered

appeal IS HEREBY DISMISSED.

APPEAL DISMISSED

3