Leray v. Nissan Motor Corp. in U.S.A.

• Decision Date: 03 November 2006
• Docket Number: No. 2005 CA 2051.,2005 CA 2051.
• Citation: 950 So.2d 707
• Parties: Daphne LERAY, Glenn Leray and Elaine Leray v. NISSAN MOTOR CORPORATION IN U.S.A., Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., Jamie Adams, Entergy Louisiana, Inc., and the State of Louisiana Through the Department of Transportation and Development.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

950 So.2d 707

Daphne LERAY, Glenn Leray and Elaine Leray v. NISSAN MOTOR CORPORATION IN U.S.A., Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., Jamie Adams, Entergy Louisiana, Inc., and the State of Louisiana Through the Department of Transportation and Development.

No. 2005 CA 2051.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

November 3, 2006.

Jerald P. Block, Matthew F. Block, Thibodaux, Darryl J. Carimi, Metairie, Counsel for Plaintiffs/Appellants Daphne Leray, Glenn Leray, and Elaine Leray.

James S. Thompson, Nicholas C. Gristina, New Orleans, Counsel for Defendants/Appellees Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company and Jamie Adams.

Keith W. McDaniel, Lance B. Williams, Covington, Counsel for Defendant/Appellee Nissan North America, Inc.

Margaret Jenkins Savoye, New Orleans, Counsel for Defendant/Appellee Entergy Louisiana, Inc.

Charles C. Foti, Jr., Attorney General, Ted Hernandez, Asst. Attorney General, Baton Rouge, Counsel for Defendant/Appellant

State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development.

Before: CARTER, C.J., GUIDRY, and McCLENDON, JJ.

GUIDRY, J.

In this appeal, the trial court sustained an exception urging the objection of res judicata raised by one of the named defendants and his insurer. Finding the trial court's ruling to be incorrect, we reverse in part.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On October 14, 1996, Daphne Leray and her parents, Glenn and Elaine Leray, filed the instant suit in Lafourche Parish against Nissan Motor Corporation in U.S.A., Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., Entergy Louisiana, Inc., the State of Louisiana through the Department of Transportation and Development, and Jamie Adams relative to a single-car accident that occurred in Lafourche Parish on October 15, 1995.¹ The accident occurred while Daphne was riding as a passenger in a 1995 Nissan pickup truck driven by Jamie Adams. All defendants, except Jamie Adams, filed answers denying liability for the injuries sustained by Daphne.

On March 16, 2005, an exception urging the objection of res judicata was filed by Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company and Jamie Adams (collectively "defendants") asserting that the claims asserted by the Lerays were barred because of a settlement agreement the defendants had entered into with Daphne Leray, wherein she allegedly fully released the defendants of any and all claims relative to the October 15, 1995 accident. The Lerays opposed the motion, averring that Daphne Leray had never entered into any such agreement.

A hearing on the exception was held on May 5, 2005, wherein the trial court received into evidence opposing affidavits from the parties and a copy of a check draft issued by Farm Bureau to the order of "Daphne Leray and attorney Jerald Block" in the amount of $15,000.00 "IN FULL PAYMENT FOR full/final settlement any/all claims." After considering the arguments presented and the evidence submitted, the trial court sustained the exception in favor of the defendants and dismissed them from the Lerays' suit with prejudice. The Lerays filed a motion for new trial, which was denied by the trial court. It is from the written judgment signed on May 17, 2005, in conformity with the trial court's May 5, 2005 ruling, that the Lerays devolutively appeal herein.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

On appeal, the Lerays allege that the trial court erred in sustaining the exception raising the objection of res judicata insofar as the judgment dismisses the claims of Glenn and Elaine Leray, who were not parties to the compromise agreement between Daphne Leray and the defendants.

DISCUSSION

A compromise,² as between the interested parties, has a force equal to the authority of the thing adjudged. Thus, a valid compromise may form the basis of a plea of res judicata. La. C.C. art. 3078; Lay v. Holi Temporary Services, 02-0290, p. 4 (La.App. 1st Cir.2/14/03), 845 So.2d 488, 490. The doctrine of res judicata, as invoked in Louisiana, is provided by statutory mandate to occur under the following circumstances:

Except as otherwise provided by law, a valid and final judgment is conclusive between the same parties, except on appeal or other direct review, to the following extent:

(1) If the judgment is in favor of the plaintiff, all causes of action existing at the time of final judgment arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the litigation are extinguished and merged in the judgment.

(2) If the judgment is in favor of the defendant, all causes of action existing at the time of final judgment arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the litigation are extinguished and the judgment bars a subsequent action on those causes of action.

(3) A judgment in favor of either the plaintiff or the defendant is conclusive, in any subsequent action between them, with respect to any issue actually litigated and determined if its determination was essential to that judgment.

La. R.S. 13:4231. Further, it has been held that La. R.S. 13:4231, in providing that "a valid and final judgment is conclusive between the same parties," requires "identity of the parties" to preclude a subsequent suit. Hence, identity of parties exists whenever the same parties, their successors, or others appear so long as they share the same "quality" as parties. Five N Company, L.L.C. v. Stewart, 02-0181, p. 16 (La.App. 1st Cir.7/2/03), 850 So.2d 51, 61. When an exception of res judicata is raised before the case is submitted and evidence is then received from both parties, the standard of...