Donald F. Flores, Jr. Versus David B. Campbell; New Era Information Technologies, LLC; And Glen M. Feucht

DONALD F. FLORES, JR. NO. 21-CA-665

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

DAVID B. CAMPBELL; NEW ERA COURT OF APPEAL
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC;
AND GLEN M. FEUCHT STATE OF LOUISIANA

July 15, 2022

Susan Buchholz
First Deputy Clerk

ON APPLICATION FOR REHEARING

Panel composed of Susan M. Chehardy,
Fredericka Homberg Wicker, and Jude G. Gravois

REHEARING DENIED.

SMC
JGG

CONCURS WITH REASONS

FHW

DONALD F. FLORES, JR. NO. 21-CA-665

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

DAVID B. CAMPBELL; NEW ERA COURT OF APPEAL
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC;
AND GLEN M. FEUCHT STATE OF LOUISIANA

J., WICKER CONCURS WITH REASONS

Respectfully, I concur in the denial of Appellee, David Campbell’s,

Application for Rehearing. I reiterate my position stated in my dissent

from the majority’s opinion in this case—that the trial court here abused

its La. C.C. Art. 1920 discretion in ordering each party to bear its own

costs. As I previously stated, here there are no equitable considerations

that would justify a deviation from the general prevailing rule that that the

prevailing party should not be assessed with costs. This litigation was

necessitated by Campbell’s improper actions and the evidence

demonstrated no action by Flores to pointlessly incur additional costs or

any other conduct to justify assessing costs against him. Moreover, as I

previously stated in my dissent, the trial court in its extensive oral reasons

for judgment provided no articulable facts to support the decision for each

party to bear its own costs and I find no factual evidence to support any

finding that the “best interests of justice” would be served in assessing

costs against Flores under the facts of this case.

Therefore, I reiterate that the only issue with which I disagree from

the majority opinion, as stated in my original dissent, is the affirming of

the trial court’s assessment of costs in this matter. Because the application

for rehearing does not raise the issue of costs, I respectfully concur in the

denial of the rehearing as to the issues raised.

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

MARY E. LEGNON
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
INTERIM CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
ROBERT A. CHAISSON SUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST
FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
HANS J. LILJEBERG
JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. FIFTH CIRCUIT
MELISSA C. LEDET
JUDGES 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053)
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF
POST OFFICE BOX 489
GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 (504) 376-1400

(504) 376-1498 FAX
www.fifthcircuit.org

NOTICE OF DISPOSITION CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY
I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE DISPOSITION IN THE FOREGOING MATTER HAS BEEN
TRANSMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 4-6 THIS
DAY 07/15/2022 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, THE TRIAL COURT CLERK OF COURT, AND AT LEAST ONE OF
THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY, AND TO EACH PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY
COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:

21-CA-665
E-NOTIFIED
24th Judicial District Court (Clerk)
Honorable Michael P. Mentz (District Judge)
Samuel Bradley Rhorer (Appellant) Daniel R. Martiny (Appellee) Albert J. Nicaud (Appellee)
Jeffrey M. Siemssen (Appellee)

MAILED
Honorable Robert J. Burns, Zachary S. Walker (Appellant) Bret D. Guepet, Jr. (Appellee)
Judge Pro Tempore (District Judge) Attorney at Law Attorney at Law
Judge Division "F" 10566 Airline Highway 3000 18th Street
24th Judicial District Court Baton Rouge, LA 70816 Metairie, LA 70002
4th Floor, Suite 4100
Gretna, LA 70053

Daniel B. Davis (Appellee)
Randall E. Estes (Appellee)
Attorneys at Law
4465 Bluebonnet Boulevard
Suite A
Baton Rouge, LA 70809