S.B., by and Through Her Parents, S.B. and M.B. Versus Jefferson Parish School Board

S.B., BY AND THROUGH HER PARENTS, S.B. NO. 23-C-590
AND M.B.
FIFTH CIRCUIT
VERSUS
COURT OF APPEAL
JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL BOARD
STATE OF LOUISIANA

February 12, 2024

Susan Buchholz
Chief Deputy Clerk

IN RE S.B.

APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE
SHAYNA BEEVERS MORVANT, DIVISION "M", NUMBER 842-576

Panel composed of Judges Jude G. Gravois,
Marc E. Johnson, and John J. Molaison, Jr.

WRIT GRANTED

The relators in this matter, who include a child with autism, S.B., allege that
S.B.’s civil rights and rights as a disabled person were violated by the actions of
the respondent through the impermissible use of corporal punishment on two
separate occasions in a special education classroom. A review of the application
demonstrates that the relators’ 2021 petition, filed in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, asserted causes of action under federal
civil rights law as well as claims actionable under Louisiana’s state laws.1 The
federal district court ultimately dismissed the relators’ petition upon finding that
the federal claims had not been adequately alleged under §504 of the
Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 701 et. seq, and Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §12132. Concurrently, the U.S. District
Court judge specifically declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the
relators’ state law claims, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §l367(c). However, the
dismissal made clear that the relators’ state claims were dismissed without
prejudice. The dismissal was affirmed by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in
an unpublished opinion dated May 30, 2023, that affirmed “the district court
dismissing the action without prejudice.”

On July 3, 2023, the relators filed a petition at the Twenty-Fourth
Judicial District Court that re-asserted the state claims the U.S. District
Court had not considered and dismissed without prejudice. The respondent
1
The original complaint is not in the record before us, but the First Amended Complaint dated June 4, 2021
is. The allegations under Louisiana law included violations of the Louisiana Human Rights Act, La. Rev. Stat.
51:2247, the Civil Rights Act for Persons with Disabilities, La. Rev. Stat. § 46:2254, and general tort claims.

23-C-590

filed a peremptory exception of res judicata (“collateral estoppel”) which
was heard by the trial court on November 16, 2023, and granted, in part, in
an order dated December 1, 2023. This timely writ application followed. In
their writ application, the relators contend that the trial court erred in
granting, in part, the respondent’s exception.

The res judicata effect of a prior judgment is a question of law that this
Court reviews de novo. Singleton v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 18-15 (La. App. 5
Cir. 10/17/18), 258 So.3d 1074, 1076-77, writ denied, 18-1814 (La. 1/14/19), 261
So.3d 787. When a Louisiana court reviews an issue of res judicata in a case in
which the initial litigation was in a federal court exercising federal question
jurisdiction, the Louisiana court will apply the federal law of res judicata. Reeder
v. Succession of Palmer, 623 So.2d 1268, 1271 (La. 1993). In order for res
judicata to bar pendent state claims in a subsequent state law proceeding, three
requirements must be met: (1) the federal court must have jurisdiction over the
federal law claims; (2) it must exercise that jurisdiction and render a judgment on
the merits; and (3) there must have been pendent state law claims that were not
litigated due to a failure of the plaintiff to assert the claims unless the federal court
clearly would have declined to exercise its pendent jurisdiction over the omitted
state claim as a matter of discretion. Id. at 1272-73 (La. 1993). In the instant case,
the relators concede that the first two Reeder criteria were met, but contend that the
third element was not met because all of their state claims were asserted in the
federal lawsuit. We agree with the conclusion that the relators’ state claims were
advanced in the earlier suit.

The respondents argued below that issue preclusion, or collateral estoppel,
common to res judicata claims, should apply to bar some of the relators’ state
claims. In Quatrevingt v. State through Landry, 17-0884 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2/8/18),
242 So.3d 625, 639, writ denied, 18-0391 (La. 4/27/18), 239 So.3d 837, the First
Circuit explained the concept of issue preclusion in the context of a res judicata
exception:

Collateral estoppel “means simply that when an issue of ultimate fact
has once been determined by a valid and final judgment, that issue
cannot again be litigated between the same parties in any future
lawsuit.” . . . Under issue preclusion, however, once a court decides an
issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision precludes
re-litigation of the same issue in a different cause of action between
the same parties. Thus, res judicata used in the broad sense has two
different aspects: a) foreclosure of litigating matters that have never
been litigated but should have been advanced in the earlier suit; and b)
foreclosure of re-litigating matters that have been previously litigated
and decided. Donley v. Town of Amite City Mayor & Council, 2014-
0169 (La. App. 1 Cir. 12/23/14), 2014 WL 7331949 (unpublished),
writ denied, 2015-0351 (La. 4/24/15), 169 So.3d 363.

Under collateral estoppel, once an issue of ultimate fact is actually and necessarily
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, that determination is conclusive in
subsequent suits based on a different cause of action involving a party to the prior
litigation. Samour v. Louisiana Casino Cruises, Inc., 01-0831 (La. App. 1 Cir.
2/27/02), 818 So. 2d 171, 174-75

2

When a federal court dismisses a claim for failure to state a claim
under F.R.C.P. Rule 12(b)(6), that dismissal does constitute a final decision
on the merits for res judicata purposes. See, Federated Dep't Stores, Inc.,
452 U.S. at 399, n. 3, 101 S.Ct. 2424; Hall v. Tower Land and Inv. Co., 512
F.2d 481, 483 (5th Cir. 1975). However, exceptions to the federal law of res
judicata exist. Terrebonne Fuel & Lube, Inc. v. Placid Refining Co., 95-654,
95-671 (La. 1/16/96), 666 So.2d 624, 634. Such exceptions include
circumstances when there is an express reservation of claims, when the
defendant acquiesces in such a reservation, or when the court in the first
action has expressly reserved the plaintiff's right to maintain the second
action. Id. In Sims v. American Ins. Co., 101 So.3d 1 (La. 2012), the
Louisiana Supreme Court stated that the only relevance of a dismissal with
prejudice, as opposed to without prejudice, is that a dismissal with prejudice
has res judicata effect on the parties to the suit dismissed with prejudice. Id.
at 7. Conversely, it stands to reason that a dismissal without prejudice does
not have a preclusive effect.

Our de novo review of the application shows that the relators asserted both
related federal and state claims pertaining to the alleged actions of the respondent.
The federal judgments specifically declined to address the relators’ state claims,
which were ultimately dismissed without prejudice. Under similar circumstances,
federal courts have tacitly acknowledged that simply because a plaintiff has not
sufficiently alleged a federal disability claim, he or she is not precluded from
asserting a state claim based on the same set of facts. See, Eskenazi-McGibney v.
Connetquot Cent. Sch. Dist., 84 F. Supp. 3d 221, 238 (E.D.N.Y. 2015); Zuro v.
Town of Darien, 432 F. Supp. 3d 116, 131 (D. Conn. 2020). There has never been
a ruling, nor the opportunity for a ruling, on the merits of the relators’ claims
brought under Louisiana’s laws. For that reason, we find that exception of res
judicata was granted in error. Accordingly, we grant the relator’s writ application,
reverse the trial court’s December 1, 2023 judgment insofar as it grants the
respondent’s Exception of Res Judicata as to Collateral Estoppel with respect to
the state law disability claims, and thereby dismisses the First Claim -
Disability Discrimination (La. R.S. 51:2247) and the Second Claim - Disability
Discrimination (La. R.S. 46:2254), with prejudice, and remand the matter for
further proceedings.

Gretna, Louisiana, this 12th day of February, 2024.

JJM
JGG
MEJ

3

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

SUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST LINDA M. WISEMAN
JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR.
FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
SCOTT U. SCHLEGEL
TIMOTHY S. MARCEL 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 02/12/2024 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:

23-C-590
E-NOTIFIED
24th Judicial District Court (Clerk)
Honorable Shayna Beevers Morvant (DISTRICT JUDGE)
Olden C. Toups, Jr. (Respondent) Christopher F. Edmunds (Relator)

MAILED
Conner R. Toups (Respondent) Brad J. Gegenheimer (Respondent)
Attorney at Law Attorney at Law
238 Huey P. Long Avenue 238 Huey P. Long Avenue
Post Office Box 484 Post Office Box 484
Gretna, LA Gretna, LA 70054

j F •ar---•

• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3.
• Print yotr name and address on th& reverse 0Agent
so that we can return the carcf to you. 0 Addressee
• Attach this card to the back of the mallplece, C. Date of Delivery
or on the front If space pennits. ;i.~!~-:<
aves
Brad J. Gegenheimer ONo
Conner R. Toups
Attorneys at Law
238 Huey P. Long A venue
Gretna, LA 70054
~-C-5~ m_1'>. ?.:1

1111111111111111111111 II I llll II III IllIIHI Ill
9590 9402 2434 6249 3573 82

PS Fonn 3811, July 2015 PSN 753().-02-000-9053