Steven B. Fontenot v. Delhommes Funeral Home, Inc.

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

09-1017

STEVEN B. FONTENOT

VERSUS

DELHOMME’S FUNERAL HOME, INC., PROFESSIONAL COLLECTION
SERVICES, INC., JAMES KING AND/OR JAMES A. DORSA, JR., DFH
INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., AND PCS INSURANCE COMPANY, INC.

*********
APPEAL FROM THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. 2002-5091
HONORABLE MARILYN C. CASTLE, DISTRICT JUDGE

*********

J. DAVID PAINTER
JUDGE

*********

Court composed of Ulysses Gene Thibodeaux, Chief Judge, Jimmie C. Peters, and J.
David Painter, Judges.

AFFIRMED.

S. Stephen Spring, II
733 East Airport Avenue, Suite 104
Baton Rouge, LA 70806
Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant:
Steven B. Fontenot

Charles M. Rush
P.O. Box 53713
Lafayette, LA 70505
Counsel for Defendant-Appellee:
Delhomme’s Funeral Home, Inc.

PAINTER, Judge.

Plaintiff, Steven B. Fontenot, appeals the trial court’s judgment dismissing his

appeal for failure to pay costs timely. Finding no error in the trial court’s judgment,

we affirm.

FACTS

On March 5, 2008, Plaintiff filed a motion to annul a judgment denying him

pauper status. The trial court, on March 11, 2008, denied the motion ex parte for

failure to state any grounds for annulment. In denying the motion, the court noted

that the appropriate way to challenge a ruling on a denial of pauper status would be

by writ application. On May 29, 2008, Plaintiff filed a motion for appeal of the

March 11 denial of his motion to annul. The appeal was granted on June 5, 2008. On

May 13, 2008, a notice of the estimated costs of appeal was sent to Plaintiff giving

him until July 3, 2008 to pay. On July 18, 2008, he filed a motion to extend the time

to pay the estimated costs of appeal. The court denied the motion noting that it was

untimely because the costs were due by July 3, 2008. In October 2008, Defendant,

Delhomme’s Funeral Home, moved to dismiss the appeal as abandoned, and the

matter was set for a hearing. On March 12, 2009, Plaintiff paid $1000.00 of the

appeal costs. A hearing was held on March 16, 2009, and judgment issued dismissing

the appeal on April 17, 2009. Plaintiff appeals that judgment.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff argues that dismissal of his appeal pursuant to La.Code Civ.P. art.

2126 is a harsh remedy and should not have been used to deprive him of his appeal.

Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 2126 provides that:

A. The clerk of the trial court, immediately after the order of
appeal has been granted, shall estimate the cost of the preparation of the

1

record on appeal, including the fee of the court reporter for preparing the
transcript and the filing fee required by the appellate court. The clerk
shall send notices of the estimated costs by certified mail to the
appellant and by first class mail to the appellee.

B. Within twenty days of the mailing of notice, the appellant shall
pay the amount of the estimated costs to the clerk. The trial court may
grant one extension of the period for paying the amount of the estimated
costs for not more than an additional twenty days upon written motion
showing good cause for the extension.

C. The appellant may question the excessiveness of the estimated
costs by filing a written application for reduction in the trial court within
the first twenty-day time limit, and the trial court may order reduction
of the estimate upon proper showing. If an application for reduction has
been timely filed, the appellant shall have twenty days to pay the costs
beginning from the date of the action by the trial court on application for
reduction.

D. After the preparation of the record on appeal has been
completed, the clerk of the trial court shall, as the situation may require,
either refund to the appellant the difference between the estimated costs
and the actual costs if the estimated costs exceed the actual costs, or
send a notice by certified mail to the appellant of the amount of
additional costs due, if the actual costs exceed the estimated costs. If the
payment of additional costs is required, the appellant shall pay the
amount of additional costs within twenty days of the mailing of the
notice.

E. If the appellant fails to pay the estimated costs, or the
difference between the estimated costs and the actual costs, within the
time specified, the trial judge, on his own motion or upon motion by the
clerk or by any party, and after a hearing, shall:

(1) Enter a formal order of dismissal on the grounds of
abandonment; or

(2) Grant a ten day period within which costs must be paid in full,
in default of which the appeal is dismissed as abandoned.

F. If the appellant pays the costs required by this Article, the
appeal may not be dismissed because of the passage of the return day
without an extension being obtained or because of an untimely lodging
of the record on appeal.

This article grants the trial court the discretion to dismiss the appeal as

abandoned where the appellant fails to pay the costs within the time specified. In this

2

case, Plaintiff failed to pay the costs timely, failed to move for an extension of time

prior to the expiration of the time to pay the costs, and, finally, attempted a partial

payment of appeal costs well after opposing counsel moved to dismiss the appeal.

Therefore, we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in dismissing the appeal,

and we decline to overturn the dismissal.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the trial court dismissing Plaintiff’s

appeal is affirmed. Costs of this appeal are to be paid by Plaintiff-Appellant, Steven

Fontenot.

AFFIRMED.

3