Lowe v. Rivers
| Decision Date | 16 January 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 15947-CA,15947-CA |
| Citation | 445 So.2d 105 |
| Parties | Harvey LOWE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joe Ollie RIVERS et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
Simmons, Nelson & Dunn by Otha Curtis Nelson, Sr., Baton Rouge, for plaintiff-appellant.
Dawkins, Coyle & Carter by Michael S. Coyle, Ruston, for defendants-appellees.
Before MARVIN, FRED W. JONES, Jr. and SEXTON, JJ.
On January 25, 1982 Lowe sued Rivers and his "unknown insurer" for worker's compensation benefits based upon an injury which allegedly occurred in the course and scope of the claimant's employment with Rivers on March 6, 1981. On March 22, 1982 Lowe filed an amended petition, adding as a defendant Union Wood Company, Inc. ("Union Wood"), but no factual basis for this alleged liability was asserted.
Union Wood filed an exception of prescription, asking that the suit be dismissed as to it because of plaintiff's failure to sue the exceptor within one year from the date of the alleged injury. The exception was tried on September 21, 1982. Subsequently, in written reasons for judgment, the trial judge found that the filing of the suit against Rivers did not interrupt prescription as to Union Wood because the two defendants were not solidarily bound. Pursuant to that ruling, judgment was signed on December 20, 1982, sustaining the plea of one year prescription and dismissing the suit as to Union Wood. No appeal was taken from this judgment.
In the meantime, on October 15, 1982, plaintiff filed a second amended petition, again naming as defendants Rivers and Union Wood, but also adding as defendants International Paper Company and Georgia Casualty and Surety Company. Otherwise, the factual allegations of the original and first amended petition were reiterated.
On March 28, 1983 Union Wood leveled an exception of res judicata at the second amended petition insofar as it again named the exceptor as a defendant, asserting that this matter was definitively resolved by the judgment sustaining its plea of prescription. The trial judge agreed and on June 29, 1983 signed a judgment sustaining the exception of res judicata, again dismissing the suit as to Union Wood.
Plaintiff appealed the last described judgment, arguing in essence that the trial court erred in its ruling that the December 20, 1982 judgment was res judicata as to the second amended petition filed on October 15, 1982.
For the reasons hereinafter detailed, we find plaintiff's argument untenable and affirm the district court judgment.
A judgment that determines the merits in whole or in part is a final judgment. A final judgment is definitive when it has acquired the authority of the thing adjudged. La.C.C.P. Articles 1841, 1842.
The authority of the thing adjudged takes place only with respect to what was the object of the judgment. The thing demanded must be the same; the demand must be founded on the same cause of action; the demand must be between the same parties, and formed by them against each other in the same quality. La.C.C. Article 2286; Reaux v. Iberia Parish Police Jury, 411 So.2d 727 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1982).
It was held in Mitchell v. Bertolla, 340 So.2d 287 (La.1976) that the phrase "cause of action" in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fust v. Fontenelle
...believe the peremptory exception of prescription falls in that category. 545 So.2d at 569. The Guidry court relied on Lowe v. Rivers, 445 So.2d 105 (La.App. 2d Cir.1984) which involved the trial court maintaining an exception of res judicata where the prior dismissal was on a plea of prescr......
-
Hillary v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
...expiration of the statute of limitations constitutes a final judgment for res judicata purposes under Louisiana law. See Lowe v. Rivers, 445 So.2d 105 (La.Ct.App.1984). "The defense of the statute of limitations is not a technical defense but substantial and meritorious .... [and] a decree ......
-
McLain v. McLain
...same parties and formed by them against each other in the same quality. LSA-R.S. 13:4231, formerly LSA-C.C. Art. 2286; Lowe v. Rivers, 445 So.2d 105 (La.App. 2d Cir.1984); Emory v. Gardner, 415 So.2d 339 (La.App. 2d Cir.1982); Orgeron v. Loop, Inc., 433 So.2d 278 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983); Ran......
-
Guidry v. Bayly, Martin & Fay of Louisiana, Inc.
...res judicata plea in a subsequent action. Federal Insurance Co. v. T.L. James, 69 So.2d 636 (La.App.1954). However, in Lowe v. Rivers, 445 So.2d 105 (La.App. 2nd Cir.1984) the court maintained an exception of res judicata where the prior action was dismissed on a plea of prescription. The c......