Summary
The Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit dismissed James E. Cloutier’s appeal from a partial summary judgment concerning the enforceability of the parties’ prenuptial agreement. The court held that the judgment was not immediately appealable because it resolved only some claims, was not designated as final under Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 1915(B), and the appeal could not be converted to a supervisory writ application because the writ deadline had expired. The court assessed appeal costs against James E. Cloutier.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the January 17, 2025 partial summary judgment was immediately appealable under former Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 1915.
- Whether the court of appeal had appellate jurisdiction over a partial summary judgment that was not designated as final and did not include an express determination that there was no just reason for delay.
- Whether the appeal could be converted into an application for supervisory writs.
Holdings
- A partial summary judgment rendered under Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 966(E) is immediately appealable only if it falls within a category listed in former article 1915(A) or is properly designated as final under article 1915(B) after an express determination that there is no just reason for delay.
- The court of appeal lacked appellate jurisdiction over the nonfinal, uncertified partial summary judgment, and the appeal had to be dismissed.
- The appeal could not be converted into an application for supervisory writs because the defendant's filing was made after the applicable thirty-day period for seeking supervisory writ review.
Key quotations
“Therefore, this court lacks appellate jurisdiction.” (at 6)
“Because we find the judgment at issue is not a final judgment under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(A) and has not been properly designated as such under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B), it is not appealable as one "in which appeals are given by law[.]"” (at 7)
Factual background
The parties executed a document titled a prenuptial agreement on July 18, 2019. Tina sought a divorce, spousal support, asset division, and a declaration that the agreement was invalid or, alternatively, a valid donation inter vivos. James maintained that a separate property regime existed and later sought revocation of alleged donations made during the marriage. The trial court granted partial summary judgment declaring the agreement unenforceable but left other declaratory claims unresolved.
Procedural history
Tina St. Philip Cloutier filed for divorce and related relief, and James E. Cloutier asserted that the parties' rights were governed by a 2019 prenuptial agreement. Tina later sought declaratory relief concerning the agreement, while James filed a separate petition to revoke alleged inter vivos donations; the actions were consolidated. The trial court entered a consent judgment determining that the agreement was not an authentic act but reserved whether it was a valid donation, then granted Tina partial summary judgment finding the agreement unenforceable. James appealed, but the court of appeal determined that the partial judgment was not designated as final under former Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 1915(B) and dismissed the appeal.