273 So. 3d 1236
La. Ct. App.2019Background
- Corley Enterprises (owner) leased property to Bear Creek Saloon; a post-concert fire in 2014 destroyed the building and contents.
- Corley sued Bear Creek and Brassco (sprinkler inspector), alleging negligence and claiming the sprinkler main inlet valve was closed at the time of the fire.
- Corley’s insurer (Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s) paid Corley $550,000 and later filed a petition for intervention as subrogee to recover those payments from defendants.
- Brassco filed a peremptory exception of prescription arguing the Underwriters’ intervention was untimely under La. C.C.P. art. 1041 (ninety-day rule for incidental demands) and the one-year delictual prescriptive period.
- The trial court sustained Brassco’s exception and dismissed the intervention with prejudice; the Underwriters appealed.
- The appellate court reversed, holding Corley’s timely suit interrupted prescription for the Underwriters’ subrogation claim because the insurer and insured share a single cause of action arising from the same occurrence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an insurer’s intervention asserting subrogation is saved from prescription by the insured’s timely suit (single cause of action doctrine) | Underwriters: as subrogee, they share a single cause of action with Corley; Corley’s timely suit interrupted prescription for the Underwriters’ claims | Brassco: intervention is prescribed — filed after one-year delictual period and beyond 90 days allowed by La. C.C.P. art. 1041 for incidental demands | Reversed trial court: insured’s timely suit interrupted prescription for the subrogated insurer because both share a single cause of action arising from the same facts; intervention is not prescribed |
Key Cases Cited
- Louviere v. Shell Oil Company, 440 So.2d 93 (La. 1983) (suit by one party interrupts prescription for others sharing a single cause of action, including a subrogated insurer)
- Stenson v. City of Oberlin, 60 So.3d 1205 (La. 2011) (intervention is an incidental demand governed by La. C.C.P. art. 1041; art. 1041 applies when parties do not share a single cause of action)
- Fair Grounds Corporation v. ADT Security Systems, 719 So.2d 1110 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1998) (applied Louviere to allow insurer’s late intervention where insurer and insured shared a single cause of action)
- Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. v. Canal Insurance Company, 202 So.3d 1160 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2016) (outlines exceptions to prescription, including when parties share a single cause of action)
- Louisiana Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. Burkett, 266 So.3d 908 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2018) (discusses insurer’s subrogation rights and standing equal to insured)
- Stamps v. Canal Indemnity Ins. Co., 35 So.3d 1127 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2010) (distinguishes Louviere where insured’s and insurer’s claims involved different causes of action)