Summary
The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit affirmed a summary judgment dismissing Evan Edmondson’s petition to annul a July 1, 2020 deficiency judgment in favor of CHP Lafayette Interests, LLC. The court held that Edmondson failed to produce evidence that the judgment was obtained through fraud or ill practice and therefore did not address his specific assignments of error or CHP’s answer regarding peremption.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether summary judgment was proper on Edmondson's petition to annul the July 1, 2020 deficiency judgment for fraud or ill practices.
- Whether the record contained sufficient evidence that the deficiency judgment was obtained through fraud or ill practice.
- Whether the appellate court needed to address Edmondson's specific assignments of error or CHP's answer after affirming the dismissal of the nullity action.
Holdings
- Summary judgment dismissing Edmondson's petition for nullity was proper because Edmondson failed to produce sufficient evidence that the July 1, 2020 deficiency judgment was obtained through fraud or ill practice.
- The opposing party cannot defeat summary judgment through allegations alone; it must produce competent evidence establishing a genuine issue of material fact or showing that the mover is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Key quotations
“Because we find Mr. Edmondson failed to produce sufficient evidence to support his claim of fraud or ill practice in rendering the July 1, 2020, judgment, we hereby affirm the July 8, 2025 amended trial court judgment” (12)
Factual background
CHP pursued executory process and a deficiency judgment against Solomon's Real Estate, LLC, Jeffery Penn, and Evan Edmondson based on promissory notes and commercial guaranties. The trial court granted CHP summary judgment on its deficiency claim and rendered a July 1, 2020 judgment awarding CHP $897,980.29, plus interest and costs. Edmondson later alleged that the judgment was submitted improperly and that CHP knowingly placed a false amount in the judgment, but the record showed that counsel for all parties was copied on the proposed judgment and that Edmondson had opportunities to object.
Procedural history
After the trial court rendered a July 1, 2020 deficiency judgment against Edmondson, he filed a motion and later a petition seeking nullity of that judgment, alleging that the judgment was improperly submitted ex parte and was obtained through fraud or ill practices. The trial court overruled CHP's exception of peremption, later granted CHP's motion for summary judgment, and dismissed the nullity petition with prejudice. The court of appeal conducted de novo review of the summary-judgment record and affirmed, finding no sufficient evidence that the deficiency judgment was obtained through fraud or ill practice; it therefore pretermitted the assignments of error and CHP's answer.