Sean Michael Breen v. Kacie Magee Breen and ABC Insurance Company ( 2020 )

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
VVI L STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL
9( FIRST CIRCUIT
2019 CA 1687
BRIDGET MARIE BREEN DUNBAR, PATRICK VERNON BREEN,
RYAN MICHAEL BREEN, AND DEVIN THOMAS BREEN
VERSUS
KACIE MAGEE BREEN AND FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
C/ W
KIRX6101 SM.,
11 .
SEAN MICHAEL BREEN
VERSUS
KACIE MAGEE BREEN AND ABC INSURANCE COMPANY
NO' 0 6 2020
Judgment Rendered:
Appealed from the 22nd Judicial District Court
In and for the Parish of St. Tammany
State of Louisiana
Suit No. 2015- 13096 c/ w 2015- 11809
The Honorable August J. Hand, Judge Presiding
Antonio Letson Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant
Covington, Louisiana Aaron Dylan Knapp
Michelle Leigh Rees Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee
New Orleans, Louisiana Sean Michael Breen
Richard Ducote Counsel for Defendant/Appellee
Covington, Louisiana Kacie Magee Breen
B. Wesley Pitts Counsel for Defendants/ Appellees
Alex J. Peragine Renee Paul Frederick, Amanda
Covington, Louisiana Sansonne, Mark J. Mansfield,
Frank P. Tranchina, Jr., Amy C.
Cowley
Edward J. Walters, Jr. Counsel for Plaintiffs/ Appellees
Baton Rouge, Louisiana Bridget Marie Breen Dunbar,
Rene Paul Frederick Patrick Vernon Breen, Ryan
Amanda Sansonne Michael Breen, and Devin Thomas
Mark J. Mansfield Breen
Frank Tranchina
Amy C. Cowley
Covington, Louisiana
James E. Moorman, III Counsel for Defendant/Appellee
Covington, Louisiana Mary Grace Knapp
Joseph Maselli, Jr. Counsel for Defendant/Appellee
Conrad C. Rolling Federal Insurance Company
New Orleans, Louisiana
Brian F. Trainor Counsel for Defendant/Appellee
Covington, Louisiana St. Tammany Parish Sheriff' s
Office -Sheriff Jack Strain, Jr.
Emily Couvillon Counsel for Intervenor/Appellee
Covington, Louisiana Warren Montgomery, 22 Judicial
BEFORE: GUIDRY, McCLENDON, AND LANIER, JJ.
2
LANIER, J.
The plaintiff/appellant, Aaron. Dylan Knapp, challenges the judgment of the
22r1 Judicial District Court which maintained a peremptory exception raising the
objection of res.judicata and set for contradictory hearing a motion for attorney' s
fees, costs, and expenses filed by the defendant/appellee, Kacie Magee Breen. For
the following reasons, we dismiss the appeal.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On March 1, 2015, Ms. Breen fatally shot her husband, Dr. Wayne Breen
the decedent). The St. Tammany Parish Sheriffs Office determined that the
shooting was in self-defense, and on April 7, 2016, a St. Tammany Parish grand
jury returned a " no true bill" with respect to the shooting. Ms. Breen has not been
charged or convicted for the shooting of her husband.
On May 1, 2015, Sean Michael Breen, a son of the decedent, filed a petition
for damages against Ms. Breen for the wrongful death of his father.' On February
21, 2018, the petition was amended to include as a plaintiff Aaron Dylan Knapp,
Sean' s half-brother and biological son of the decedent. Aaron was subsequently
made a party in the instant case by court order.
On August 5, 2015, a federal interpleader complaint was filed in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana by Pruco Life Insurance
Company against Ms. Breen and the estate of the decedent. During her marriage to
the decedent, Ms. Breen had been named the beneficiary of two of the decedent' s
life insurance policies. The decedent' s adult children, excluding Aaron, were
named as claimants to the insurance funds, which were placed in the registry of the
1 Sean, as well as all the other adult children of the decedent in the instant case, are not the
children of Ms. Breen.
2 The other adult children of the decedent, along with Federal Insurance Agency, filed a separate
petition for damages on July 30, 2015, in which they also alleged Ms. Breen to be responsible for
the wrongful death of the decedent. That action was subsequently consolidated with the instant
case, but was then dismissed with prejudice.
3
federal court.' The federal court entered judgment in favor of Ms. Breen on June
9, 2017, finding she was the sole claimant to the insurance funds and dismissing all
the competing claims of the adult children.
On June 27, 2017, Ms. Breen filed a peremptory exception raising the
exception of res judicata and a motion for attorney' s fees and costs pursuant to La.
R.S. 9: 2800. 19( B). 4 The basis of the exception of res judicata was the judgment of
the federal court in the interpleader action, where the federal court determined that
Ms. Breen acted in self-defense in the shooting and killing of the decedent.
Further, Ms. Breen argued that pursuant to La. R.S. 9: 2800. 19( B), she is entitled
attorney' s fees, costs, and expenses, as the federal court' s judgment rendered her
immune to suit for the wrongful death of the decedent.
The June 2017 exception and motion were originally denied by the trial
court for prematurity, since the interpleader judgment of the federal court was still
subject to appeal. The re -urged exception and motion were again denied by the
trial court, as the court at that time did not find the federal interpleader judgment
precluded judgment on the wrongful death claim. On August 15, 2018, Ms. Breen
filed a second supplemental peremptory exception raising the objection of res
judicata and motion for attorney' s fees and costs pursuant to La. R.S.
9: 2800. 19( B), after the U.S. Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, affirmed the
interpleader judgment of the Eastern District of Louisiana.
3 Aaron moved to intervene in the interpleader action, but his motion was denied by the federal
court for untimeliness.
4 Louisiana Revised Statutes 9: 2800. 19 states:
A. A person who uses reasonable and apparently necessary or deadly force or
violence for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or
his property in accordance with R.S. 14: 19 or 20 is immune from civil action
for the use of reasonable and apparently necessary or deadly force or violence.
B. The court shall award reasonable attorney fees, court costs, compensation for
loss of income, and all expenses to the defendant in any civil action if the
court finds that the defendant is immune from suit in accordance with
Subsection A of this Section.
EI
The trial court denied Ms. Breen' s request for an evidentiary hearing on her
second exception and motion, and Ms. Breen filed a supervisory writ with this
court. This court vacated the trial court' s ruling and remanded for an evidentiary
hearing. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court granted the exception
raising the objection of res judicata and ordered that a contradictory hearing on the
motion for attorney' s fees and costs be set at a later date. Aaron has appealed this
judgment.
DISCUSSION
Appellate courts have the duty to determine sua sponte whether their subject
matter jurisdiction exists, even when the parties do not raise the issue. Gaten v.
Tangipahoa Parish School System, 2011- 1133 ( La. App. I Cir. 3/ 23/ 12), 91 So. 3d
1073, 1074; Advanced Leveling & Concrete Solutions v. Lathan Company Inc.,
2017- 1250 ( La. App. I Cir. 12/ 20/ 18), 268 So. 3d 1044, 1046 ( en bane). Under
Louisiana law, a final judgment is one that determines the merits of a controversy
in whole or in part. La. C. C.P. art. 1841. A final judgment must be identified as
such by appropriate language. La. C. C. P. art. 1918. A valid judgment must be
precise, definite, and certain. Gaten, at 1074. A final appealable judgment must
contain decretal language, and it must name the party in favor of whom the ruling
is ordered, the party against whom the ruling is ordered, and the relief that is
granted or denied. - 1d. These determinations should be evident from the language
of a judgment without reference to other documents in the record. Id.The judgment on appeal contains the following decretal language:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED
that the exception of res judicata is maintained, and, accordingly, this
suit and all claims asserted therein are DISMISSED with prejudice;
and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a contradictory hearing
shall be set on the motion for attorney' s fees, costs, and expenses filed
by Defendant Kacie Breen pursuant to La. R.S. 9: 2800. 19( B).
5
In the first paragraph, the trial court does not identify the specific party or
parties to whom the judgment is in favor, nor does it identify the party or parties
whom the judgment is against. The failure to name any plaintiff or defendant in a
judgment rendered in a case with multiple plaintiffs and defendants makes the
judgment fatally defective, because one cannot discern from its face to whom relief
is granted or against whom the judgment may be enforced. Input/ Output Marine
Systems, Inc. v, Wilson Greatbatch, Technologies, Inc., 2010- 0477 ( La. App. 5 Cir.
10/ 29/ 10), 52 So. 3d 909, 916.
The second paragraph of decretal language merely sets the motion for
attorney' s fees and costs for a contradictory hearing, but does not grant or deny any
relief This portion of the judgment only determines a preliminary matter in the
course of the action and is therefore interlocutory. See La. C.C.P. art. 1841;
Durbin v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 525 So.2d 726, 727. Further, the
judgment does not contain a designation that it is a final judgment after an express
determination that there is no just reason for delay. In the absence of such a
determination, the order cannot constitute a final judgment for the purpose of an
immediate appeal. See La. C. C. P. art. 1915( B). As such, the second paragraph of
the decretal language is interlocutory and not final, and this court lacks appellate
jurisdiction over the instant matter.
For the reasons set forth above, this appeal is dismissed. All costs of this
appeal are assessed to the plaintiff/appellant, Aaron Dylan Knapp.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
rel