Fuller v. State, DOTDFuller v. State, DOTD
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Thibodeaux
Jerald W. Fuller sued the State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) for damages sustained when, while driving a dump truck for John Bailey Construction Company, Inc. across a movable span bridge on Highway 27 at Hackberry, Louisiana, the south end of the movable span dropped and the dump truck hit the fixed span of the bridge. Liability was assessed against DOTD and the trial court awarded $60,-000.00 in general damages, $15,000.00 for past loss of wages, and $21,400.00 as future lost wages. Fuller died before the district judge signed the judgment on December 18, 1991.
On January 10, 1992, Linda Breaux Fuller Oswalt moved to become substituted as party plaintiff because of her position as executrix of Fuller’s estate and Fuller’s survivor under LSA-C.C. 2315. The substitution occurred after the district judge signed the judgment in favor of Fuller.
Oswalt appealed the judgment on the basis that the amounts awarded were too low and thus manifestly erroneous. The DOTD also filed a suspensive appeal, appealing both the judgment signed December 18, 1991 in favor of Fuller and the denial of defendant’s Motion to Reopen Testimony and Motion for New Trial and/or for Remittitur.
DOTD claims the judgment is invalid and null since it was rendered in favor of a deceased person, Jerald W. Fuller, on December 18, 1991. Fuller died on November 8, 1991. Both the trial court and the attorneys involved were aware of the death of Fuller.
The jurisprudence of Louisiana has held that a judgment for or against a deceased party is an absolute nullity. Williams v. Brown,
In Fountain v. American Employers’ Insurance Co.,
“Despite the later substitution of parties plaintiff, the judgment appealed is against a plaintiff who was dead when the judgment was rendered. Although*496 the proceedings in the district court were valid up to the moment of plaintiffs death, at that instant the action abated as to him, and the substitution of parties plaintiff did not cure the nullity.”
The judgment appealed from is an absolute nullity. See also, White v. Givens,
In view of the above cited cases, this Court is of the opinion that the judgment entered by the trial court on December 18, 1991 is an absolute nullity. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed without prejudice. Following the procedure adopted in Gulfco Finance of Livingston, Inc. v. Lee,
DISMISSED AND REMANDED.