241 So. 3d 1040
La. Ct. App.2018Background
- Plaintiffs (Plaquemines Parish Civil Service Commission and Director Ellen Barrios) sought injunctive relief to prevent enforcement of Ordinance 15-107, which relocated the Civil Service Department offices from Belle Chasse to Port Sulphur.
- The Parish Council adopted Ordinance 15-107 under § 5.03 of the Plaquemines Parish Home Rule Charter; Council controls parish property and office assignments and funds the Commission.
- Plaintiffs argued the relocation (1) impaired the Commission’s ability to operate effectively and efficiently in violation of La. Const. Art. X § 13(B), and (2) unlawfully infringed on executive functions in violation of La. Const. Art. VI § 6.
- Trial was held October 27–28, 2016; the trial court denied a temporary restraining order earlier and, after trial, dismissed plaintiffs’ claims on January 9, 2017, finding plaintiffs failed to meet their burden by clear and convincing evidence.
- Plaintiffs appealed; the appellate court affirmed, concluding (a) relocation did not impair the Commission’s effective/efficient operation, and (b) Council action did not unlawfully invade executive functions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ordinance 15-107 impaired the Civil Service Dept.'s ability to operate effectively and efficiently under La. Const. Art. X § 13(B) | Relocating offices to Port Sulphur made the Department unable to operate effectively/efficiently | Council has authority to assign parish office space; plaintiffs offered insufficient proof of impairment | Court held plaintiffs failed to prove impairment by clear and convincing evidence; ordinance constitutional |
| Whether the Council's relocation unlawfully invaded executive functions in violation of La. Const. Art. VI § 6 | Relocation was legislative overreach into executive operations of an independent commission | Council acted under charter authority to manage parish property and office assignments; historical precedent showed prior Port Sulphur location | Court held no unconstitutional invasion; Council acted within charter authority |
| Whether plaintiffs were entitled to injunctive relief preventing enforcement of the ordinance | Injunctive relief necessary to prevent irreparable harm and preserve commission operations | Ordinance presumed valid; plaintiffs failed to show irreparable harm or constitutional violation | Court denied injunctive relief; plaintiffs failed burden to obtain injunction |
| Applicability of prior Plaquemines Parish Council v. Petrovich rulings to bar the Council's action | Plaintiffs asserted prior decision restricted Council actions regarding Commission location | Defendants argued prior case inapplicable and current ordinance lawful | Court found prior mandate inapplicable/moot and did not overturn ordinance |
Key Cases Cited
- Stobart v. State, Dep't of Transp. and Dev., 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993) (standard for reviewing factual findings — manifest error/clearly wrong)
- Randolph v. Alexandria Civil Serv. Comm'n, 899 So.2d 857 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2005) (ordinances presumed constitutional)
- Theriot v. Terrebonne Parish Police Jury, 436 So.2d 515 (La. 1983) (burden to prove unconstitutionality is clear and convincing evidence)
- City of Lafayette v. Butcher Air Conditioning Co., 392 So.2d 757 (La. App. 3 Cir. 1980) (party attacking statute/ordinance bears burden of proof)
- Gurst v. City of Natchitoches, 428 So.2d 502 (La. App. 3 Cir. 1983) (municipal acts interpreted to sustain validity if reasonably possible)
- Plaquemines Parish Council v. Petrovich, 662 So.2d 542 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1995) (prior litigation involving parish council and Commission; court deemed inapplicable here)