Lacerte v. State, 041621 LACA1, 2020 CA 1000
| Opinion Judge | WHIPPLE, C.J. |
| Party Name | DAVID LACERTE v. STATE OF LOUISIANA, DARYL PURPERA, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS LOUISIANA LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, STEPHEN STREET, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS STATE INSPECTOR GENERAL |
| Attorney | Jill L. Craft W. Brett Conrad, Jr. Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant, David LaCerte Jeff Landry Louisiana Attorney General David G. Sanders Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Defendants/Appellees, State of Louisiana and Daryl Purpera, individually and in his official capacity... |
| Judge Panel | BEFORE WHIPPLE, C.J., WELCH, AND CHUTZ, JJ. CHUTZ, J., concurring. |
| Case Date | April 16, 2021 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
On Appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Docket No. 654973 The Honorable William Dupont and the Honorable Max Tobias, Judges Ad Hoc Presiding
Jill L. Craft W. Brett Conrad, Jr. Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant, David LaCerte
Jeff Landry Louisiana Attorney General David G. Sanders Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Defendants/Appellees, State of Louisiana and Daryl Purpera, individually and in his official capacity as Louisiana Legislative Auditor Thomas M. Flanagan Camille E. Gauthier Andy Dupre New Orleans, Louisiana
Jeff Landry Louisiana Attorney General Preston J. Castille, Jr. Katia D. Bowman Vicki M. Crochet Ne'Shira Millender Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Defendant/Appellee, Stephen Street, Jr., individually and in his official capacity as State Inspector General
BEFORE WHIPPLE, C.J., WELCH, AND CHUTZ, JJ.
WHIPPLE, C.J.
This matter is before us on appeal by plaintiff, David LaCerte, from a judgment of the trial court granting a motion for attorney's fees and costs by defendants, the State of Louisiana and Daryl Purpera, individually and in his official capacity as Louisiana Legislative Auditor, pursuant to a judgment granting the defendants5 special motion to strike pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 971. For the reasons that follow, we reverse.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
David LaCerte, former Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Veterans Affairs ("the Department"), [1] filed a defamation suit against the State of Louisiana, Daryl Purpera, individually and in his official capacity as Louisiana Legislative Auditor, and Stephen Street, Jr., individually and in his official capacity as State Inspector General, arising from a joint investigation conducted by the Legislative Auditor and the Inspector General that culminated in a report published by the defendants, via a press release. Mr. LaCerte alleged that the report and press release wrongfully accused him of criminal conduct, including falsifying public records by providing an inaccurate military biography on the Department's website and engaging in "questionable" hiring, spending, travel and organizational practices during his tenure with the Department.
The defendants filed a joint special motion to strike pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 971, seeking to dismiss Mr. LaCerte's suit against all defendants in their individual and official capacities.2 Mr. LaCerte opposed the motion, filing an expedited motion to strike contending that the defendants' motion was untimely pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 971(C)(1) and that the State, as well as Mr. Street and Mr. Purpera in their official capacities, have no constitutional rights and, thus, are not "persons" entitled to relief under Article 971.3 By a judgment dated May 15, 2019, the trial court denied the expedited motion to strike filed by Mr. LaCerte and granted the defendants' Article 971 special motion to strike. Mr. LaCerte appealed this judgment and the defendants answered the appeal.
Meanwhile, having prevailed on the Article 971 special motion to strike, on October 25, 2019, the State and Mr. Purpera, individually and in his official capacity, filed a motion for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 971(B), which provides that "a prevailing party on a special motion to strike shall be awarded reasonable attorney fees and costs." Following a hearing, [4] on March 12, 2020, the trial court issued written reasons for judgment granting the motion for attorney's fees and costs.5 A written judgment was signed on June 22, 2020, awarding attorney's fees in the amount of $48, 606.00 with legal interest, as well as court costs associated with the filing of the motion.6 Mr. LaCerte then filed the instant appeal contending in five assignments of error that the trial court erred in awarding attorney's fees and costs in favor of the defendant. The State and Mr....
To continue reading
Request your trial