Ioannis Maroulis v. Entergy Louisiana, Llc, Et Al.

Supreme Court of Louisiana
June 08, 2021
Second Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
IOANNIS MAROULIS
VS.
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC, ET AL.
No.2021-CC-00384
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Hotel Investors, LLC - Applicant Defendant; Expotel Hospitality Services,
LLC - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Writ Of Certiorari, Parish of Jefferson,
24th Judicial District Court Number(s) 793- 761, Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit,
Number(s) 20-C-226;
_ _ _ _ _ _
June 08, 2021
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
Weimer, C.J., would grant and docket.
Genovese, J., would deny.
JDH
SJC
WJC
JBM
PDG
06/08/2021 "See News Release 025 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

@
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2021-CC-00384
IOANNIS MAROULIS
VERSUS
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL,
FIFTH CIRCUIT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON
PER CURIAM.
filed a motion for summary judgment in the district court sceking to be dismissed
from the third party demand ofdefendant Hotel Investors, LLC, based on an illegal,
and therefore absolutely null, construction contract berween the parties. The purposc
of the construction contract was completed by, and contractual payment *'as madc
to, Castleman. During the construction project the plaintiff suffered an clectrical
injury on the job site, the safety of which was allegedly the responsibility of
Castleman. Nevertheless, Castleman seeks to avoid responsibility for damages by
raising the nullity of the contract, as he was not a licensed contractor in this state, rn
violation of La. R.S. 37:2160(,4.)(1)
The trial court denied Castleman's motion for summary judgment, and thc
appellate court reversed and granted summary judgment in Castleman's favor,
dismissing the third party demand against it.
We find La. C.C. art. 2033 applicable, providing in pertinent part: "An
absolutely null contract, or a relatively null contract that has been declared null by
the court, is deemed never to have existed. . . . Nevertheless, a performance rendered
under a contract that is absolutely null because its object or its cause is illicit or
Third party defendant Castleman, Donlea and Associates, LLC ("Castteman")
06/08/21

immoral may not be recovered by a party who knew or should have known of the
defect that makes the contract null. . . ." Further, 1984 Revision Comment (c) to La.
C.C. art. 2033 states: "lAl party who knew or should hove known at the time of
contracting of o defect that made the contract absolutely null moy not avsil himself
of the nullity when the purpose of the illegol controct hss been accomplished
This conclusion flows naturally from the principle expressed in the traditional
Roman maxim, nemo propriam turpitudinem allegare potest (no one may invoke
his own turpitude), sometimes called the 'clean hands' doctrine (Emphasis
added.)
For these reasons, we conclude that the district court could not be saici to have
erred in denying Castleman's motion for summarl' judgment. Therefore, we grant
the instant writ application, reverse the appellate court, and reinstate the district court
judgment.
WRIT GRANTED; APPELLATE COURT REVERSED; DISTRIC'I
COURT JUDGMENT REINSTATED.
2