Jaga v. Cleaver
| Docket Number | 2020 CA 1028,2020 CA 1029 |
| Decision Date | 14 December 2021 |
| Parties | SUCCESSION OF GERONIMO JI JAGA v. JOJUYOUNGHI CLEAVER, AS SURVIVING SPOUSE AND AS NATURAL TUTRIX OF THE MINOR CHILD, K.J.J.; LAILA MINJA, AS NATURAL TUTRIX OF THE MINOR CHILD, T.G.J.; SHONA PRATT AND HIROJI PRATT AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, SUCCESSOR TO WESTERN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY F/K/A AIG ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY, SUCCESSOR TO AMERICAN GENERAL ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
On Appeal from the Sixteenth Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of St. Mary, State of Louisiana No. 19232 c/w 128836 The Honorable Keith R. J. Comeaux, Judge Presiding
Ronald E. Stutes
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Attorney for Plaintiffs/Defendants/Appellants Shona Pratt Hiroji Pratt, and Nikki Michaux
Emily E. Eagan
New Orleans, Louisiana
Attorney for Defendant/Appellee American General Life Insurance Company
M Janice Villarrubia
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Attorney for Plaintiff/Defendant/Appellee Jojuyounghi" Joju" Cleaver as Administratrix and as Agent under Specific Power of Attorney for Kayode Ji Jaga Joseph A. Prokop, Jr.
This appeal in consolidated succession and concursus suits concerns the inclusion of an annuity in the active mass of the succession to satisfy the forced heirs' legitime and the surviving spouse's marital portion, the fractional amount of the marital portion calculation, the inclusion of non-cash assets as part of the legitime, and the denials of a motion for new trial, a motion to traverse the detailed descriptive list, and a motion to compel discovery.[1] Finding error, we reverse, vacate, and remand.
Geronimo Ji Jaga, a/k/a Elmer G. Pratt ("the decedent") died intestate on June 3, 2011, in Tanzania, Africa. At the time of his death the decedent was married to Jojuyounghi Cleaver ("Joju"). The decedent fathered five children: Kayode Ji Jaga ("Kayode"), who was born during the marriage of the decedent and Joju; Shona Pratt ("Shona") and Hiroji Pratt ("Hiroji"), who were born during the decedent's prior marriage; Nikki Michaux ("Nikki"); and Tkumsah Geronimo Jaga ("Tkumsah"), who was the child of the decedent and Glory William "Laila" Minja ("Laila").[2] Kayode and Tkumsah were both younger than twenty-three years old at the time of the decedent's death, and thus were forced heirs.[3]
One of the main issues in these appeals concerns an annuity that arose from a settlement agreement and release the decedent entered into on August 25, 2000, with certain defendants and their insurer in a personal injury claim he had filed.[4]Pursuant to the settlement agreement, the defendants' insurer made a "qualified assignment" within the meaning of Section 130(c) of the Internal Revenue Code to American General Assignment Corporation ("AGAC") of its obligation to make certain periodic payments due in the future in settlement of the decedent's claim.[5]To fund its obligation, AGAC purchased an annuity from American General Annuity Insurance Company ("AGAIC").[6] The annuity provided for certain guaranteed payments to be made monthly to the decedent during his lifetime with several yearly lump sum payments.[7] Further, as part of the settlement agreement, if the decedent died before July 15, 2020, any payments due through that date were to be paid in equal portions to Shona and Hiroji, who had been designated as beneficiaries of the annuity.
On November 28, 2011, Joju (on her own behalf)[8] and the decedent's major children, Shona, Hiroji, and Nikki, filed a joint petition to open his succession in the Sixteenth Judicial District Court for the Parish of St. Mary, which was docketed as case number 19232. On October 5, 2012, Joju filed a petition in the succession suit for recognition of her rights as a surviving spouse. She sought, among other issues, to include the annuity in the active mass of the succession in a revised detailed descriptive list in order to calculate the marital portion, to which she alleged she was entitled, and to calculate the forced heirs' legitime. Laila, as the natural tutor of her minor child, Tkumsah, filed a petition to assert his rights as an alleged forced heir. Shona and Hiroji intervened in the suit to assert their rights. On May 10, 2013, Joju was appointed the administrator of the succession after the prior administrator, Stuart Hanlon, resigned. Joju also filed a motion to require Nikki and Tkumsah to prove paternity.
A trial was held on September 3, 2015, to address whether Nikki established she was the decedent's daughter, whether the annuity should be included in the active mass of the decedent's succession, and whether Joju was entitled to the marital portion. The parties offered testimony from Joju and Nikki and introduced exhibits, including the annuity. They also stipulated that Tkumsah was a forced heir of the decedent. After issuing reasons for judgment on November 4, 2015, the district court signed a judgment on December 7, 2015, finding that: Nikki and Tkumsah were the decedent's children; Tkumsah was an heir of the decedent; all of the decedent's property and funds were separate property; the annuity should be included in the active mass calculation and was his separate property; and Joju was entitled to a marital portion of one-fifth (1/5) of the decedent's estate.
Pursuant to Laila's motion for new trial, the judgment was amended on February 8, 2016, to more specifically identify the annuity included in the calculation of the active mass of the decedent's succession as "American General annuity policy number 403, 994," which listed the decedent as the payee; to define Joju's marital portion as a usufruct for life of one-fifth (1/5) of the decedent's net estate; and to require Joju to post a bond.[9]
Meanwhile, on December 6, 2012, Joju, on behalf of Kayode and herself, filed a separate suit for his legitime and her marital portion against Western National Life Insurance Company (Western National), which at that time was the successor company to AGAIC, [10] in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court for East Baton Rouge Parish.[11] Later, Shona and Hiroji were added as defendants. In pertinent part, Joju alleged in her petition that the decedent had purchased an annuity from AGAIC from proceeds he received from a civil rights lawsuit. The petition further alleged that although Kayode was a forced heir, he was not a named beneficiary of the annuity and he had not received anything due to the decedent's death. Accordingly, the petition alleged that as a forced heir, Kayode was entitled to receive his legitime, and, in calculation of the legitime, he was entitled to demand collation of any gifts which impinged on the legitime. Laila, on behalf of Tkumsah, filed a petition for intervention, alleging he was a forced heir and making similar allegations regarding his legitime.
In response, in pertinent part, Shona and Hiroji filed a peremptory exception raising the objection of no cause of action and a dilatory exception raising the objection of prematurity.[12] After a hearing, the district court sustained the exception raising the objection of no cause of action, pretermitted the other exceptions as moot, and dismissed Joju's and Laila's claims on behalf of their children with prejudice.[13] Joju and Laila appealed. Cleaver v. Western National Life Insurance Co., 2014-0972 (La.App. 1 Cir. 7/28/15), 180 So.3d 406, 408-09, writ denied, 2015-1619 (La. 10/30/15), 179 So.3d 617. (TR 129)
On appeal, this court determined that the district court erred in sustaining the exception raising the objection of no cause of action insofar as Joju and Laila had stated in their petitions a cause of action for the annuity to be included in the active mass of the succession. Cleaver, 180 So.3d at 413. This court then concluded that, to the extent that Joju and Laila on their children's behalf were asserting a cause of action for reduction of the annuity proceeds directly against Shona and Hiroji, such potential claims were premature as there had been no calculation of the succession mass. Id. at 413-14. Thus, this court determined that Joju and Laila could not establish at that time that they were entitled to a reduction due to an impingement on their children's legitime. Id. This court vacated that part of the district court's judgment sustaining Shona and Hiroji's exception raising the objection of no cause of action and dismissing Joju's and Laila's claims with prejudice. Id. at 414-15. This court also rendered judgment maintaining Hiroji and Shona's dilatory exception raising the objection of prematurity and dismissing Joju and Laila's claims against them without prejudice.[14] Id. at 415. The matter was remanded for further proceedings.[15] Id.
While Joju's suit was on appeal, in response to her action against it, American General Life Insurance Company (AGLIC) a successor insurance company to the original issuer of the annuity, filed a concursus suit in the Sixteenth Judicial District Court, which was docketed as case number 128836, on August 31, 2015, naming as defendants Joju (in her own behalf and as tutor of her minor child), Laila (as tutor of her minor child), Shona, and Hiroji. AGLIC alleged it had initially been paying the annuity payments to Shona and Hiroji following the decedent's death, but it began retaining one-half of the annuity...
To continue reading
Request your trial