Donald F. Flores, Jr. Versus David B. Campbell; New Era Information Technologies, LLC; And Glen M. Feucht

DONALD F. FLORES, JR. NO. 21-CA-665

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

DAVID B. CAMPBELL; NEW ERA COURT OF APPEAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; AND GLEN M. FEUCHT STATE OF LOUISIANA

July 21, 2022

Susan Buchholz First Deputy Clerk

ON APPLICATION FOR REHEARING

Panel composed of Susan M. Chehardy, Fredericka Homberg Wicker, and Jude G. Gravois

REHEARING GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART, WITH REASONS

SMC

REHEARING GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART WITH THE REASONS SET FORTH BY J. CHEHARDY JGG

CONCURS, IN PART, DISSENTS IN PART, WITH REASONS

FHW

CHEHARDY, C.J.

REHEARING GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART In a timely application for rehearing, plaintiff-appellant Donald Flores,

individually and on behalf of New Era Information Technologies, LLC, argues that interest should have been awarded from the date of judicial demand rather than the date of judgment, citing Trans-Global Alloy Ltd. v. First Nat’l Bank of Jefferson Par., 583 So.2d 443, 459 (La. 1991), and Semco, LLC v. Grand Ltd., 16-342 (La. App. 5 Cir. 5/31/17), 221 So.3d 1004, 1039, writ denied, 17-1291 (La. 11/6/17), 229 So.3d 475, among others. We agree. Accordingly, we grant rehearing for the limited purpose of modifying the decree to award interest from the date of judicial demand. In all other respects, rehearing is denied. 21-CA-665 1

DONALD F. FLORES, JR. NO. 21-CA-665 VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT DAVID B. CAMPBELL; NEW ERA COURT OF APPEAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; STATE OF LOUISIANA AND GLEN M. FEUCHT

J., WICKER CONCURS IN PART, DISSENTS IN PART WITH

REASONS

While I concur in the majority’s decision to grant appellant Flores’ application for rehearing in part as to the issue of the point in litigation from which judicial interest should run, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision to deny in part Flores’ application for rehearing as it relates to the issue of costs. I reiterate my position stated in my dissent from the majority’s opinion and in my concurring opinion from the denial of the first application for rehearing filed in this case—that the trial court here abused its La. C.C. Art. 1920 discretion in ordering each party to bear its own costs. This litigation was necessitated by Campbell’s improper actions and the evidence demonstrated no action by Flores to justify a deviation from the general rule that the prevailing party is not assessed costs. Moreover, I previously stated, the trial court here in its extensive oral reasons for judgment provided no articulable facts to support the decision for each party to bear its own costs and I find no factual evidence to support any finding that the “best interests of justice” would be served in assessing costs against Flores under the facts of this case.

Accordingly, because it is my opinion that the trial court under the facts of this case abused its discretion in assessing any costs against Flores, I respectfully 21-CA-665 1 dissent in part from the majority’s decision to deny Flores’ application for rehearing as to the issue of whether the costs should be borne by each party in this case. 21-CA-665 2 SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

MARY E. LEGNON FREDERICKA H. WICKER INTERIM CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK JUDE G. GRAVOIS MARC E. JOHNSON ROBERT A. CHAISSON SUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ STEPHEN J. WINDHORST FIRST DEPUTY CLERK HANS J. LILJEBERG JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. FIFTH CIRCUIT MELISSA C. LEDET JUDGES 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053) DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF POST OFFICE BOX 489 GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 (504) 376-1400

(504) 376-1498 FAX www.fifthcircuit.org

NOTICE OF DISPOSITION CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE DISPOSITION IN THE FOREGOING MATTER HAS BEEN TRANSMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 4-6 THIS DAY 07/21/2022 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, THE TRIAL COURT CLERK OF COURT, AND AT LEAST ONE OF THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY, AND TO EACH PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:

21-CA-665 E-NOTIFIED 24th Judicial District Court (Clerk) Honorable Michael P. Mentz (District Judge) Samuel Bradley Rhorer (Appellant) Daniel R. Martiny (Appellee) Albert J. Nicaud (Appellee) Jeffrey M. Siemssen (Appellee)

MAILED Honorable Robert J. Burns, Zachary S. Walker (Appellant) Bret D. Guepet, Jr. (Appellee) Judge Pro Tempore (District Judge) Attorney at Law Attorney at Law Judge Division "F" 10566 Airline Highway 3000 18th Street 24th Judicial District Court Baton Rouge, LA 70816 Metairie, LA 70002 4th Floor, Suite 4100 Gretna, LA 70053

Daniel B. Davis (Appellee) Randall E. Estes (Appellee) Attorneys at Law 4465 Bluebonnet Boulevard Suite A Baton Rouge, LA 70809