Louisiana State University System Board of Supervisors Through Louisiana State University Veterinarian Teaching Hospital v. Robert Johnson
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 3d Cir., April 7, 2021
Louisiana State University System Board of Supervisors Through Louisiana State University Veterinarian Teaching Hospital v. Robert Johnson, No. CA-0020-0272 (La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. Aug. 5, 2020).
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Input/Output Marine Systems, Inc. v. Wilson Greatbatch, Technologies, Inc. 52 So. 3d 909
- Mouton v. AAA Cooper Transp. 237 So. 3d 594
Opinion text
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT
CA 20-272
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS THROUGH LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
VETERINARIAN TEACHING HOSPITAL
VERSUS
ROBERT JOHNSON
**********
APPEAL FROM THE
TWELFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF AVOYELLES, NO. 2019-7200A
HONORABLE KERRY LYNDON SPRUILL, DISTRICT JUDGE
**********
SHANNON J. GREMILLION
JUDGE
**********
Court composed of Billy H. Ezell, Shannon J. Gremillion and Phyllis M. Keaty,
Judges.
APPEAL SUSPENDED; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
Jerold Edward Knoll
The Knoll Law Firm
Post Office Box 426
Marksville, La 71351
(318) 253-6200
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE:
Robert Johnson
Amy D. Richard
Louisiana Department of Justice-Assistant Attorney General
Post Office Box 94005
Baton Rouge, La 70804-9005
(225) 326-6550
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS:
Louisiana State University Board of Supervisors
Louisiana State University Veterinarian Teaching Hospital
GREMILLION, Judge.
This court issued a rule ordering Plaintiff-Appellant, Louisiana State
University System Board of Supervisors through Louisiana State University
Veterinarian Hospital (LSU), to show cause, by brief only, why the appeal should
not be dismissed as having been taken from a judgment lacking proper decretal
language. Input/Output Marine Systems, Inc. v. Wilson Greatbatch, Technologies,
Inc., 10-477 (La.App. 5 Cir. 10/29/10), 52 So.3d 909. For the reasons that follow,
we suspend the appeal and remand this matter to the trial court with instructions to
issue a judgment containing proper decretal language.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
LSU filed suit to recover the balance on an open account established by
Defendant, Robert Johnson (Johnson), for the veterinary medical treatment of his
cat. Johnson filed an answer and reconventional demand for overpayment and
damages for the filing of a frivolous suit. In response, LSU filed exceptions of no
cause of action, vagueness, and ambiguity and want of amicable demand for the
reconventional demand for overpayment, and exceptions of no cause of action and
vagueness and ambiguity to the reconventional demand for damages. Johnson
subsequently filed a peremptory exception of prescription to LSU’s suit on open
account. Following a trial on the exceptions, on April 3, 2020, a written Judgment
was signed, which provided, in pertinent part, as follows:
REASONS HANDED DOWN on February 28, 2020 and Written Reasons
dated March 20, 2020,
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1. The Preemptory Exception of Prescription filed by JOHNSON is
hereby GRANTED;
2. The Exceptions to JOHNSON’S Reconventional Demand filed by
LSU . . . are hereby deemed and declared moot in view of the grant
of the Preemptory Exception of Prescription filed by JOHNSON[;]
3. The Reconventional Demand by JOHNSON for the claim for
Overpayment is hereby dismissed as having prescribed for the
same reasons assigned to the granting of JOHNSON’S
Reconventional demand; and
4. JOHNSON’S demand for Sanctions under La. C.C.P. Art. 863 is
hereby GRANTED and LSU is hereby cast with attorney[’]s fees
in the sum of Twenty Thousand and No/100 ($20,000.00) Dollars,
together with legal interest thereon from March 20, 2020 until
paid, and for all costs of court incurred in these proceedings.
On April 28, 2020, LSU filed a motion for suspensive appeal of that
judgment. When the record was received by this court, we discovered that the
judgment did not contain decretal language dismissing LSU’s claim against
Johnson on the open account. Therefore, we ordered LSU to show cause why the
appeal should not be dismissed as having been taken from a judgment lacking
proper decretal language.
LSU responded to the rule to show cause, arguing that when the trial court
granted Johnson’s exception of prescription, LSU’s action was dismissed by law.
Further, because LSU has only one claim to be barred, LSU urges that the granting
of the prescription exception necessarily disposes of LSU’s entire action. As such,
LSU maintains that the relief granted is determinable from the judgment itself. We
disagree.
In the instant case, the judgment contains no decretal language dismissing
LSU’s claim on Johnson’s open account. Consequently, this court finds that it
lacks jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal. Accordingly, we suspend
the appeal and remand this matter to the trial court for the limited purpose of
rendering a proper final judgment as we did in Mouton v. AAA Cooper Transp., 17-
666, 17-667 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1/10/18), 237 So.3d 594.
2
DECREE
For the reasons given, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the merits of
this appeal because it was taken from a judgment that lacks proper decretal
language. This appeal is suspended, and the matter is remanded to the trial court
with instructions to sign a judgment containing proper decretal language no later
than September 4, 2020. The Clerk of Court for the Twelfth Judicial District Court
shall forward the judgment so signed to this court as a supplement to the appellate
record, in duplicate.
APPEAL SUSPENDED; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION.
Uniform Rules―Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-16.3.
3