Louisiana Board of Ethics In the Matter of Michelle Barnett

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL

W( C
y lJ FIRST CIRCUIT

2021 CA 0458

LOUISIANA BOARD OF ETHICS IN THE MATTER OF MICHELLE
BARNETT

DATE OF JUDGMENT. APR 13 2022

ON APPEAL FROM THE LOUISIANA BOARD OF ETHICS
NUMBER 2015- 0662, PANEL B
STATE OF LOUISIANA

ETHICS ADJUDICATORY BOARD —PANEL B
WILLIAM COOPER, III, GREGORY McDONALD,
AND ESTHER A. REDMANN

Kathleen M. Allen Counsel for Appellee
Tracy M. Barker Louisiana Board of Ethics
LaToya D. Jordan
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

David A. Lowe Counsel for Appellant
Baton Rouge, Louisiana Michelle Barnett

BEFORE: GUIDRY, HOLDRIDGE, AND CHUTZ, JJ.

Disposition: AFFIRMED.

CHUTZ, J.

Respondent -appellant, Michelle Barnett, appeals the order of the Louisiana

Ethics Adjudicatory Board ( EAB), denying her motion for summary judgment,

which sought dismissal of the charges levied against her by the Louisiana Board of

Ethics ( BOE) based on allegations of violations of the Louisiana Code of

Governmental Ethics. See La. R. S. 42: 1101 et seq. Because the EAB' s order is

clearly controlled by case law precedent and statutes; the issues involve no more

than an application of well- settled rules to recurring fact situations; the EAB

opinion and conclusions of law adequately explain the order; and no error of law

appears on the record, we affirm in accordance with La. Uniform Courts of Appeal

Rule 2- 16. 2. A(2),( 4),( 5), & ( 6). See La. C. C. P. art. 966. See also Louisiana Bd. of

Ethics Matter of Villere, 2015- 1939 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 12/ 22/ 16), 208 So. 3d 940,

949, writ denied, 2017- 00128 ( La. 3/ 13/ 17), 216 So. 3d 807 ( the proper inquiry in a

motion for summary judgment is whether the evidence in existence at the time of

the filing of formal charges, viewed in the aggregate, establishes that the BOE fully

investigated the allegations and uncovered a factual basis sufficient to substantiate

a probable violation of the Code of Governmental Ethics, notwithstanding that the

presumption may later be proven to be untrue). Accordingly, the EAB' s order,

denying respondent' s motion for summary judgment, is affirmed. Appeal costs are

assessed against respondent -appellant, Michelle Barnett.

AFFIRMED.

2