Favret v. Favret
| Docket Number | 2022-CA-0820 |
| Decision Date | 31 July 2023 |
| Parties | JORDAN JONES FAVRET v. JOHN FAVRET, KATHY FAVRET, JUSTIN PHIPPS BOYCE, AND MADISON GALLO BOYCE |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
APPEAL FROM CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, ORLEANS PARISH NO. 2022-00146 DIVISION "J" Honorable D. Nicole Sheppard, Judge
D Douglas Howard, Jr. J. Katheryn Dore HOWARD REED & PEDERSEN COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT, Jordan Jones Favret
Timothy G. Schafer William H. Dunckelman, Jr. SCHAFER & SCHAFER COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE, Kathy Favret
Trevor C. Davies WANEK KIRSCH DAVIES LLC, COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS/APPELLEES, Justin Phipps Boyce and Madison Gallo Boyce
Court composed of Chief Judge Terri F. Love, Judge Tiffany Gautier Chase, Judge Dale N. Atkins
This is a negligence action. In this appeal, Jordan Jones Favret ("Ms. Jones Favret") seeks review of the trial court's September 9, 2022 judgment, which sustained the Peremptory Exceptions of No Cause of Action filed by Justin Boyce and Madison Boyce (collectively "the Boyces") and by Kathy Favret ("Ms. Kathy Favret") thereby dismissing Ms. Jones Favret's claims against them. Ms Jones Favret sought damages from the Boyces and Ms. Kathy Favret for negligent precipitation of a third party's crime, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Upon review, we find that the trial court did not err in its determination that Ms. Jones Favret failed to state a cause of action for each of her claims. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Further, Ms. Kathy Favret filed an "Answer to Appeal" with this Court. Therein, she seeks damages, including attorney fees and costs, for the filing of a frivolous appeal by Ms. Jones Favret pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 2164.[1] For the following reasons, we deny Ms. Kathy Favret's request for damages, attorney fees, and costs.
This lawsuit stems from a custody dispute between Ms. Jones Favret and her former husband, John Favret ("Mr. Favret"), over their minor child, CF.[2] On January 6, 2022, Ms. Jones Favret instituted the suit by filing a Petition for Damages ("Petition") in Civil District Court for Orleans Parish ("Orleans Civil District Court") and naming Mr. Favret, Ms. Kathy Favret, and the Boyces as defendants. According to her Petition, the 24th Judicial District Court for Jefferson Parish granted Ms. Jones Favret emergency custody of CF on October 22, 2021, and issued a warrant for the return of CF to Ms. Jones Favret's custody. That same day, Ms. Jones Favret called the New Orleans Police Department ("NOPD") to execute the warrant. In the Petition, Ms. Jones Favret contended that when the NOPD officers ("officers") arrived at the residence that Mr. Favret and his mother, Ms. Kathy Favret, shared ("the Favret Residence"), Mr. Favret refused to comply with the warrant. Further, Ms. Jones Favret alleged that the officers requested assistance from the Orleans Parish Civil Sheriff, but when the deputies arrived to execute the warrant, Ms. Kathy Favret informed the deputies that Mr. Favret had already left through the back door of the Favret Residence with CF. Unbeknownst to Ms. Jones Favret and law enforcement, Mr. Favret brought CF to the home where the Boyces lived ("the Boyce Residence") after leaving the Favret Residence.
Later that same day, Ms. Jones Favret filed a Petition for Protection from Abuse ("Petition for Protection") on behalf of CF in Orleans Civil District Court, which granted her request for a temporary restraining order. Thereafter, according to the Petition, officers returned to the Favret Residence, and Ms. Kathy Favret stated that Mr. Favret and CF were not present and that she did not know their location. The officers then served the Petition for Protection on Ms. Kathy Favret, and she continued to deny having knowledge about Mr. Favret's and CF's location. Despite her statements to the contrary, the Petition alleged that cell phone data revealed that Ms. Kathy Favret had been in communication with both Mr. Favret and CF after Mr. Favret had arrived at the Boyce Residence. Per the Petition, at some point, Ms. Kathy Favret brought clothes and other personal items to the Boyce Residence. However, neither Ms. Kathy Favret nor the Boyces informed Ms. Jones Favret or law enforcement of Mr. Favret's and CF's location. On October 23, 2021, a warrant for Mr. Favret's arrest was issued. On October 24, 2021, officers apprehended and arrested Mr. Favret at the Boyce Residence, where CF was also present.
In her Petition, Ms. Jones Favret asserted that Mr. Favret's actions in absconding with CF constituted a criminal act in violation of La. R.S. 14:45.1.[3]Further, Ms. Jones Favret sought damages against Ms. Kathy Favret and the Boyces for negligently precipitating Mr. Favret's criminal interference with Ms. Jones Favret's custody of CF, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
On February 24, 2022, the Boyces filed a Peremptory Exception of No Cause of Action and a Motion for Sanctions (" the Boyces' First Exception of No Cause of Action"). Therein, the Boyces asserted that Ms. Jones Favret's Petition failed to state a cause of action against them. Specifically, they argued that "there is no duty to control, or warn against, the criminal actions of a third person" and that "there is no duty to protect others from the criminal acts of third parties." Further, they contended that Ms. Jones Favret's Petition "completely fail[ed]" to state a cause of action for negligent or intentional infliction of emotional distress and that "it is well-settled in Louisiana that a claim of mental distress absent physical injury is not actionable."
On March 25, 2022, Ms. Kathy Favret also filed a Peremptory Exception of No Cause of Action ("Ms. Kathy Favret's First Exception of No Cause of Action"). In her First Exception of No Cause of Action, Ms. Kathy Favret adopted the same arguments asserted by the Boyces in their First Exception of No Cause of Action. She further emphasized that the Petition "set[] forth no allegations that would make [Ms. Kathy Favret] legally responsible for any of [Mr. Favret]'s conduct" and set forth no allegations establishing that Ms. Kathy Favret owed a duty to Ms. Jones Favret. Additionally, Ms. Kathy Favret asserted that under Louisiana negligence law, "[i]f no duty exists, then there can be no liability."
On May 5, 2022, Ms. Jones Favret filed an "Opposition to the Peremptory Exceptions of No Cause of Action Filed by Defendants [Ms.] Kathy Favret [and the Boyces]." Conceding their argument that Louisiana law does not recognize a duty to protect others from the criminal activities of third persons, Ms. Jones Favret countered that the Boyces and Ms. Kathy Favret owed a duty because "the law does recognize a duty not to negligently cause a third party to commit a crime that is a foreseeable consequence of negligence." She also asserted that Louisiana law recognizes a "broad duty not to negligently precipitate the crime of a third party" and that "[the Boyces' and Ms. Kathy Favret's] actions precipitated Mr. Favret's criminal acts and were a cause-in-fact of Ms. Favret's harm." On May 19, 2023, the trial court held a hearing on the Boyces' and Ms. Kathy Favret's First Exceptions of No Cause of Action. The trial court sustained the exceptions, but ordered Ms. Jones Favret to amend her petition.
Prior to the hearing on the Boyces' and Ms. Kathy Favret's First Exceptions of No Cause of Action, on May 18, 2022, Ms. Jones Favret filed a "Motion for Leave of Court to File First Amending and Supplemental Petition;" and the trial court granted her Motion on May 26, 2022. Ms. Jones Favret's Amended Petition alleged that officers served the Petition for Protection on Ms. Kathy Favret before she brought toiletries and other personal items to Mr. Favret and CF. Regarding the Boyces, Ms. Jones Favret contended that they knew Mr. Favret had not parked his vehicle in front of their residence in order "to avoid detection by law enforcement officers or Ms. [Jones] Favret." Further, Ms. Jones Favret alleged that the Boyces were aware that Mr. Favret "was refusing to return custody of the minor child, CF, to Ms. [Jones] Favret" and "was concealing himself and the minor child, CF, from law enforcement and Ms. [Jones] Favret."
Additionally, Ms. Jones Favret alleged that she experienced physical symptoms due to the emotional distress caused by the Boyces and Ms. Kathy Favret, including anxiety, insomnia, panic attacks, weight loss of thirty pounds, and depression. Ms. Jones Favret contended that their actions were partially responsible for her having "to seek additional medical attention as well as therapy to address the physical injuries caused by . . . [the] emotional distress."
On May 31, 2022, Ms. Kathy Favret filed a second "Peremptory Exception of No Cause of Action" ("Ms. Kathy Favret's Second Exception of No Cause of Action"). Therein, Ms. Kathy Favret argued that Ms. Jones Favret's Amended Petition "contains no new substantive allegations that would support a cause of action against" her. On June 22, 2022, the Boyces filed a "Peremptory Exception of No Cause of Action and Motion for Costs and Attorneys' Fees" ("the Boyces' Second Exception of No Cause of Action"). Like Ms. Kathy Favret, they argued that Ms. Jones Favret's Amended Petition failed to state a cause...
To continue reading
Request your trial