Harris v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Co.
164 So. 3d 216
La. Ct. App.2014Background
- Harris filed a damages petition in the Twenty-Ninth JDC for Hurricane Katrina-related property claims against Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Co.
- Prescriptive suspension was alleged because Harris was a putative member of several class actions, though no class definitions or membership were pled.
- The trial court granted prescription for non-class claims but granted lis pendens as to Orrill, Oubre, Press, Christenberry, Chalona, and dismissed the suit without prejudice.
- Harris appealed the lis pendens ruling; prescription issue was not appealed.
- Plaintiff alleged putative class membership in multiple class actions to gain suspended prescription under La. C.C.P. art. 596.
- The appellate court held lis pendens valid for Oubre, Orrill, Press, Christenberry, Chalona, but invalid as to Buxton and remanded for proceedings on that issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether lis pendens applies to the named class-action claims | Wicker asserts putative class status suspends prescription and supports lis pendens. | Louisiana Citizens argues identical claims with the class actions satisfy lis pendens. | Yes for Oubre, Orrill, Press, Christenberry, Chalona; no for Buxton. |
| Identity of parties requirement for lis pendens under Article 531 | Putative class members share identity via same claims. | Only named or identified parties matter for lis pendens. | Buxton fails identity requirement; others satisfy it. |
| Effect of class-action res judicata and Article 597 on lis pendens | Putative members’ claims may be preserved by class-action framework. | Final judgments in the class actions bar claims via res judicata and Article 597. | Class-action judgments would be conclusive and bind putative members for Oubre, Orrill, Press, Christenberry, Chalona. |
| Effect of notice and certification status on Buxton claims | Buxton certification denial did not extinguish putative status. | Post-denial, there is no class-action identity to support lis pendens. | Buxton claims not preserved for lis pendens; remand otherwise. |
Key Cases Cited
- Elfer v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc., 804 So.2d 71 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2001) (putative class members can join later; lis pendens extends to all members when appropriate)
- Taranto v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corp., 62 So.3d 721 (La. 2011) (prescription suspension and class-action implications clarified)
- Oubre v. Louisiana Citizens Fair Plan, 961 So.2d 504 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2007) (class-action certification and suspension framework applied)
- Orrill v. Louisiana Citizens Fair Plan, 96 So.3d 647 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2012) (class action definitions and pending status upheld)
- Press v. Louisiana Citizens Fair Plan Property Ins. Corp., 12 So.3d 392 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2009) (class-action definitions and pending status affirmed)
- Chalona v. Louisiana Citizens Property Ins. Corp., 3 So.3d 494 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2008) (class certification and subsequent rulings discussed)
- Buxton v. Louisiana Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 125 So.3d 1057 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2012) (post-denial effects and scope of lis pendens analyzed)
- New Orleans Firefighters Ass’n of Louisiana, Local 632 v. City Civil Serv. Comm’n of New Orleans, 371 So.2d 339 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1979) (class-action binding effects on members)
- Duckworth v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 125 So.3d 1057 (La. 2012) (Putative-class members bound by class-action judgments)
- United Gen. Title Ins. Co. v. Casey Title, Ltd., 800 So.2d 1061 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2001) (test for lis pendens mirrors res judicata final-judgment analysis)