Katina Green v. Ronald Barbier and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company ( 2023 )

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
NO. 2023 CW 0892
KATINA GREEN
PAGE 1 OF 2
VERSUS
RONALD BARBIER AND STATE
FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE 2023
DECEMBER 11
INSURANCE COMPANY
Mutual Automobile
and State Farm
Ronald Barbier
In Re:
writs,
applying for supervisory
Insurance Company,
Parish of Ascension, No.
23rd Judicial District Court,
133287.
HESTER AND GREENE, JJ.
CHUTZ, LANIER,
BEFORE: GUIDRY), C. j. 1
denying the
WRITGRANTED. The trial court erred by
defendants, Ronald Barbier
exception of prescription filed by
Plaintiff' s
Insurance Company.
and State Farm Mutual Automobile
in question occurred on February
petition alleges the accident
defendants introduced evidence demonstrating
11, 2021; however,
2021. Once defendants
occurred on February 9,
the accident
petition was filed outside
offered evidence that established the
period, plaintiff then bore
the applicable one- year prescriptive prescription
competent evidence that
the burden of proving with LLC,
See Gibson v. Jalou Cash' s,
was interrupted or suspended.
308 So. 3d 1188, 1192.
La. ist Cir. 7/ 17/ 20),
2019- 1308 ( App. a
not exempt
valentem will
contra non
The doctrine of
of prescription if her
plaintiff' s claim from the running
willfulness or neglect;
is attributable to her own
ignorance
know what she could have
that is, a plaintiff w`` 11 be deemed to
diligence. Alliance Hospitality, L. L. C.
learned by reasonable
322 So. 3d
1st Cir. 2/ 24/ 21),
v. Esquivel, 2020- 0807 ( La. App.
rule when
257. Courts refuse to apply the discovery
253,
basis of her failure to
diligence is the
plaintiff' s lack of
assert a cause of action, and the facts giving rise to her cause
knowable within the prescriptive
of action are reasonably
offered no evidence
Plaintiff, Katina Green,
period. id.of action
demonstrating that the facts giving rise to her cause
prescriptive period.
knowable within the
were not reasonably
2022, more than
Thus, plaintiff' s petition filed on February 10,
9, 2021 accident, is prescribed.
one year after the February
and
prescription is granted,
Defendants' peremptory exception of State
against defendants, Ronald Barbier and
plaintiff' s claims
are dismissed.
Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
WRC
WIL
CHH
HG
would deny the writ
GUIDRY, C. J., dissents and
construed
Prescriptive statutes are strictly
application.
against prescription and in favor of the obligation sought
that
to be constructions,
which
extinguished; thus, of two possible
an action should be
favors maintaining, as opposed to barring,
2004- 0646 ( La. 1/ 19/ 05), 892 So. 2d
adopted. Carter v. Haygood,
valentem
1261, 1268. The jurisprudential doctrine of contra non
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF 1,
PPEAL9 FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 2023 CW 0892
PAGE 2 OF 2
and justice
in some
circumstances, equity
recognizes that,
the plaintiff is
prescription be suspended because
require that
when it accrues, for
of action
unable to exercise her cause
Hospitality, L. L. C.
her control. See Alliance
reasons outside
Cir. 2/ 24/ 21), 322 So. 3d
La. App. 1st
v. Esquivel, 2020- 0807 (
doctrine applies, the
situations when the
253, 256. In those
nature of the
equitable
to weigh the
court is allowed
whether
case to determine
individual
circumstances in each
of
prescription will be tolled. See Id. Considering the nature
the f act
presented here, particularly
circumstances
the unique
bore the wrong date, I find the
that the initial accident report ch
of the doctrine in
i
application
district court' s
presription was
exception of
denial of defendants'
reasonable and was not manifestly erroneous.
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
IP PUTY
UTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT