Jeff Mercer, Llc v. State Of Louisiana Through The Department Of Transportation And Development, Willis Jenkins, John Eason, And Pam Higginbotham

Supreme Court of Louisiana
March 09, 2021
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
JEFF MERCER, LLC
VS.
STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND
DEVELOPMENT, WILLIS JENKINS, JOHN
EASON, AND PAM HIGGINBOTHAM
No.2020-CC-01386
_ _ _ _ _
_
IN RE: Th
e State of Louisiana Through the Department of Transportation and
Development - Applicant Defendant; Willis Jenkins - Applicant Defendant; John
Eason - Applicant Defendant; Michael Murphy - Applicant Defendant; Barry L.
Lacy - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ, Parish of Ouachita,
4th Judicial District Court Number(s) C-20073151, Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit,
Number(s) 2020-C-0488;
_ _ _ _ _ _
March 09, 2021
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
McC
allum, J., recused.
SJC
JLW
JDH
JTG
WJC
PDG
03/09/2021 "See News Release 009 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

03/09/21
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
NO. 2
020-CC-1386
J
EFF MERCER, LLC
VS
.
STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT, WILLIS JENKINS, JOHN
EASON, AND PAM HIGGINBOTHAM
O
n Supervisory Writ to the 4th Judicial District Court, Parish of Ouachita
P
ER CURIAM*
Defendants seek review of a ruing of the district court which sustained their
peremptory exception raising the objection of no cause of action, but declined to
dismiss plaintiff’s action against them.
La. Code Civ. P. art. 934 addresses the effect of sustaining the peremptory
exception:
When the grounds of the objection pleaded by the
peremptory exception may be removed by amendment of
the petition, the judgment sustaining the exception shall
order such amendment within the delay allowed by the
court. If the grounds of the objection raised through
the exception cannot be so removed , or if the plaintiff
fails to comply with the order to amend, the action, claim,
demand, issue, or theory shall be dismissed. [emphasis
added].
I
n the instant case, the district court sustained defendants’ exception and
further made a finding that it did not anticipate plaintiff would be able to amend its
petition to allege a cause of action against defendants. Based on our review of the
facts presented, we agree there is no conceivable possibility plaintiff could state a
cause of action against defendants. See Alexander & Alexander, Inc. v. State, Div.
of Admin., 486 So. 2d 95, 100 (La. 1986) (explaining “the right to amend is not so
* McCallum, J. recused.

absolute as to permit the same when such amendment would constitute a vain and
useless act.”). Accordingly, the clear and unambiguous language of La. Code Civ.
P. art. 934 mandates that plaintiff’s claim must be dismissed.

DECREE
For the reasons assigned, the writ is granted. The judgment of the district
court sustaining the peremptory exception raising the objection of no cause of action
in favor of defendants, the State of Louisiana through the Department of
Transportation and Development, Willis Jenkins, John Eason, and Pam
Higginbotham, is amended to provide the claim of plaintiff, Jeff Mercer, LLC,
against these defendants is dismissed with prejudice.