63 So. 3d 1092
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- Hurricane Katrina damaged a 39-unit apartment complex; Riverbend Capital, LLC is the mortgagee and loss payee; Lloyd's issued a policy to Gawain Ministries, L.L.C. with Riverbend as loss payee; Lloyd's issued a check for $114,020.41 payable to Gawain Ministries and Riverbend marked 'in full and final settlement' and both endorsed it; Gawain Ministries sued Lloyd's in 2006 for full recovery; Riverbend filed the current suit and the trial court granted summary judgment and res judicata; the prior Gawain Ministries judgment (2008) found the check language constituted full and final settlement and dismissed with prejudice; Lloyd’s argued accord and satisfaction and res judicata, which the trial court granted; on appeal, the court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether accord and satisfaction bars Riverbend’s claim | Riverbend argues unresolved damages remain | Lloyd’s tendered a full and final settlement via the check thus precluding suit | Yes; accord and satisfaction applies |
| Whether the check was an unconditional tender or conditional settlement | Riverbend contends the check was unconditional | Check language shows 'IN FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT' and was negotiated | Check was not an unconditional tender; language and negotiation establish settlement |
| Whether res judicata bars the current suit | Riverbend asserts not barred by prior judgment | Earlier judgment conflicted with current claims | Renders res judicata issue moot on appeal |
| Whether Lloyd’s properly pled accord and satisfaction as an affirmative defense | Affirmative defense not properly pled or noticed | 11th Affirmative Defense communicated accord and satisfaction; no prejudice to Riverbend | Affirmative defense properly pled and notice adequate |
| Whether discovery issues affected the summary judgment ruling | Incomplete discovery of key witnesses | Language of the check and undisputed facts render further discovery unnecessary | No merit to challenge based on discovery; summary judgment proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Anesthesia East v. Bares, 594 So.2d 1085 (La.App. 4 Cir.1992) (establishes elements of accord and satisfaction)
- Hawthorne v. Barbier, 841 So.2d 28 (La.App. 4 Cir.2003) (summary judgment and accord and satisfaction standards)
- Bienvenu v. Allstate Ins. Co., 819 So.2d 1077 (La.App. 4 Cir.2002) (affirmative defenses must be specially pled for fair notice)
- Walters v. Metro. Erection Co., 644 So.2d 1143 (La.App. 4 Cir.1994) (protects against trial by ambush but allows adequate notice)