SRG Baton Rouge II, L.L.C v. Patten/Jenkins BR Popeye's, L.L.C. ( 2024 )

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST CIRCUIT
2023 CA 1203
SRG BATON ROUGE II, L.L.C.
VERSUS
PATTEN/JENKINS BR POPEYE'S, L.L.C.
Judgment Rendered: MAY 3 1 2024
Appealed from the
19th Judicial District Court
In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge
State of Louisiana
Case No. C679391
The Honorable Trudy M. White, Judge Presiding
Jimmy R. Faircloth, Jr. Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee
Mary Katherine Price SRG Baton Rouge II, L.L.C.
Alexandria, Louisiana
Antonio M. "Tony" Clayton
Port Allen, Louisiana
Geoffrey D. Westmoreland Counsel for Defendant/Appellant
Anna W. O'Neal Patten/Jenkins BR Popeye's, L.L.C.
Caroline D. Alford
Shreveport, Louisiana
Timothy W. Hardy
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Druitt G. Gremillion, Jr.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
BEFORE: GUIDRY, C.J., CHUTZ, AND LANIER, JJ.
LANIER,J.
In this declaratory action seeking performance, reformation, and damages
relative to the enforceability of a commercial lease and the option to purchase
provision contained therein, defendant, Patten/Jenkins BR Popeye's, L.L.C.
Patten/ Jenkins"), appeals the trial court's summary judgment rendered in favor of
plaintiff, SRG Baton Rouge II, L.L.C. (" SRG"). SRG answered the appeal.
Although the trial court rendered summary judgment in favor of SRG, ordering
Patten/Jenkins to take the necessary steps to perfect the sale of the property to
SRG, the judgment did not dispose of all the claims presented to the court. In a
companion appeal also decided this date, Patten/ Jenkins challenges the trial court's
judgment on damages, as well as several other interlocutory rulings. See SRG
Baton Rouge II, L.L.C. v. Patten/Jenkins BR Popeye' s, L.L.C., 2023 CA 1204
La. App. 1 Cir. --/--/--), --- So.3d ---(" SRG II").
Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 1915( B)(l) authorizes the appeal
of a partial summary judgment as to " one or more but less than all of the claims,
demands, issues, or theories" presented where the judgment is designated as a final
judgment by the trial court after a determination that there is no just reason for
delay. Absent a designation of a judgment as final under Article 1915( B)(l), a
partial summary judgment may be revised at any time prior to the rendition of the
judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties.
La. Code Civ. P. art. 1915(B)(2); Quality Environmental Processes, Inc. v.
Energy Development Corporation, 2016-0171 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 4/12/ 17), 218
So.3d 1045, 1054. Because the trial court did not designate the judgment as final
under Article 1915(B)(l), this partial judgment cannot constitute a final judgment
for purposes of an appeal. Thus, we dismiss this appeal, noting that we will
consider the arguments raised regarding the summary judgment in connection with
our review in SRG II.
2
Shortly after Patten/Jenkins filed its appeal in this matter and in SRG II,
SRG moved to consolidate the two appeals, arguing the " the two appeals should
11
proceed in one streamlined proceeding. SRG added it had " no objection to
Patten/Jenkins raising its grievances with the summary judgment ruling on appeal
11
along with the final judgment awarding SRG damages. Patten/Jenkins agreed
with consolidation of the appeals for purposes of consideration by the same panel,
but opposed consolidation for the purposes of briefing. This court granted the
motion to consolidate, ordering that SRG II be consolidated with this appeal for
argument and submission. When an unrestricted appeal is taken from a final
judgment, the appellant is entitled to seek review of all adverse interlocutory
rulings prejudicial to him, in addition to review of the final judgment appealed.
Young v. City of Plaquemine, 2004-2305 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 11/4/05), 927 So.2d
408, 411. Thus, the issue ofwhether summary judgment was appropriately granted
in this case will be fully addressed in SRG II.
APPEAL AND ANSWER TO APPEAL DISMISSED.
3