272 So. 3d 120
La. Ct. App.2019Background
- Plaintiffs (customers of Alexandria’s municipally owned utility) sued in 2007 alleging the City overcharged customers via improper fuel adjustment calculations and sought damages, restitution, and class certification.
- The trial court (Sept. 13, 2016) dismissed plaintiffs’ suit without prejudice under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, reserving claims for damages and attorneys’ fees and directing plaintiffs to seek administrative review by the City Council under Ordinance No. 178-2016.
- The City Council authorized an ALJ and administrative appeal procedure; the ALJ issued a certified "Order of Appeal" on July 20, 2017 finding for the City and certifying the order as appealable.
- Plaintiffs filed a petition for judicial review on Sept. 27, 2017 (69 days after the ALJ order); the City excepted for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as untimely.
- The trial court sustained the exception and dismissed the petition with prejudice (Feb. 9, 2018). Plaintiffs appealed; the court of appeal affirmed, holding the administrative decision became final because all applicable appeal periods expired before plaintiffs filed for judicial review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of judicial review of ALJ/City Council order | Plaintiffs: no specific appeal deadline in the ALJ order; prior dismissals were without prejudice so claims could be refiled | City: plaintiffs waited 69 days after ALJ order; applicable statutory or local appeal deadlines (45, 30, or 60 days) expired | Held: Filing was untimely under applicable timelines; court lacked jurisdiction and dismissal with prejudice appropriate |
| Applicable appeal period for municipal utility adjudication | Plaintiffs: APA and other timelines not applicable; ALJ order controlled | City: borrow LPSC statute (La. R.S. 45:1192 — 45 days) or APA (30 days) or devolutive appeal (60 days) | Held: APA (30 days) inapplicable because City Council is a political subdivision not an "agency" under APA; municipal/local ordinance and 60-day appellate period support untimeliness; all applicable periods expired |
| Effect of prior dismissal without prejudice | Plaintiffs: earlier dismissals preserved right to refile without being bound by appellate delays | City: prior dismissal contemplated administrative adjudication; once administrative decision became final, appellate periods control | Held: Dismissal without prejudice did not excuse timely appeal of the administrative ruling; final administrative order became res judicata absent timely review |
| Ability to raise constitutional challenges notwithstanding timeliness | Plaintiffs: constitutional defects in Ordinance 178-2016 could be raised in court regardless | City: procedural deadlines control reviewability | Held: Court refused to reach merits of constitutional claims because it lacked jurisdiction due to plaintiffs’ untimely filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Metro Riverboat Assoc., Inc. v. La. Gaming Control Bd., 797 So.2d 656 (La. 2001) (appellate court lacks jurisdiction to address merits when trial court lacked jurisdiction)
- Gordon v. City of New Orleans, 9 So.3d 63 (La. 2009) (applies same standard of review to municipal utility rate-making as to LPSC)
- Corbello v. Sutton, 446 So.2d 301 (La. 1984) (no equitable laches where statutes set time delays for review)
- Smith v. City of Minden, 622 So.2d 1206 (La. App. 2 Cir. 1993) (timeliness of appeal from governmental administrative determinations is jurisdictional)
- Robinson v. City of Baton Rouge, 566 So.2d 415 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1990) (administrative rulings become final and res judicata after appeal delays run)
- Rhyne v. OMNI Energy Servs., 155 So.3d 155 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2014) (de novo review of lack of subject matter jurisdiction)
- ANR Pipeline Co. v. La. Tax Comm'n, 851 So.2d 1145 (La. 2003) (discusses constitutional allocation of judicial power)