Devin James Barnett v. The Domain Companies, LLC, Domain Cos. Management, LLC, Domain Companies of Louisiana, LLC, Domain South Market, LLC, and XYZ Insurance Company

No. 2025-CA-0609 · Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit · March 17, 2026 · No. 2025-CA-0609

Summary

The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment dismissing Devin James Barnett’s personal injury claims against several Domain Companies entities. The court held that the summary judgment was premature because the trial court failed to address Barnett’s pending motion to compel and inadequate-discovery arguments before ruling, and remanded for further proceedings.

Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Judge Monique G. Morial; Judge Joy Cossich Lobrano; Judge Tiffany Gautier Chase
Jurisdiction
Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit
Decision date
March 17, 2026
Docket number
2025-CA-0609
Procedural posture
Plaintiff appealed a summary judgment dismissing his personal-injury claims with prejudice. The court of appeal reversed and remanded because the trial court ruled on summary judgment without addressing plaintiff's pending motion to compel or his claim that discovery was inadequate.
Standard of review
Summary judgment is reviewed de novo under the same criteria applied by the trial court, in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. A trial court's decision to hear a summary-judgment motion despite allegedly incomplete discovery is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Devin James Barnett v. The Domain Companies, LLC, Domain Cos. Management, LLC, Domain Companies of Louisiana, LLC, Domain South Market, LLC, XYZ Insurance Company
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

summary judgmentdiscovery disputestandard of reviewcivil procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

civil proceduretortsappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by granting summary judgment while discovery remained incomplete and while plaintiff's motion to compel was unresolved.
  2. Whether the defendants owed plaintiff a duty to protect him from third-party criminal acts occurring off the defendants' premises as a result of the defendants' pet-walking policy.

Holdings

  1. The trial court abused its discretion by granting summary judgment without considering plaintiff's inadequate-discovery argument and without disposing of the pending motion to compel. The summary-judgment motion was therefore premature.
  2. The June 18, 2025 judgment granting summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff's claims with prejudice was reversed, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings.

Key quotations

Although the language of [Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure] article 966 does not grant a party the absolute right to delay a decision on a motion for summary judgment until all discovery is complete, the law does require that the parties be given a fair opportunity to present their case. (5)
Based on the Roadrunner factors, and the procedural posture of the case prior to the summary judgment hearing, we find the trial court abused its discretion when it granted Appellees’ motion for summary judgment without even considering Appellant’s inadequate discovery argument. (8)

Factual background

In the early morning of December 15, 2019, Devin James Barnett was robbed at gunpoint and shot in the leg while walking his dog near South Rampart Street in New Orleans. Barnett alleged that the defendants, who operated his residential property, negligently required residents to walk pets outside the premises without providing adequate lighting, security, or other safety accommodations despite knowledge of criminal activity in the surrounding area. He suffered a serious leg injury, underwent several surgeries, and remained hospitalized for approximately four months.

Procedural history

Barnett filed a petition for damages in the Civil District Court for Orleans Parish in December 2020. The defendants answered, and discovery disputes developed, including an unresolved motion to compel and a request for a corporate-representative deposition. The defendants moved for summary judgment before discovery was complete. The trial court heard only the summary-judgment motion, granted it on June 18, 2025, and dismissed Barnett's claims with prejudice. Barnett timely appealed.

Remand instructions

The trial court must conduct further proceedings consistent with the opinion and should dispose of the pending motion to compel before ruling on the defendants' motion for summary judgment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…