Joseph Palmisano, III v. Blake Bergeron, and Remly Bergeron

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT JOSEPH PALMISANO, III NO. 2021 CW 0053 VERSUS FEB 1 8 2D21 BLAKE BERGERON AND REMLY BERGERON In Re: Loandepot. com, LLC, applying for supervisory writs, 32nd Judicial District Court, Parish of Terrebonne, No. 0182849. BEFORE: WELCH, CHUTZ, AND WOLFE, JJ. STAY DENIED; WRIT GRANTED IN PART; DENIED IN PART. The trial court' s January 12, 2021 judgment granting the exceptions filed by plaintiff, Joseph Palmisano, III, and dismissing the petition for intervention and damages filed by relator, loanDepot. com, LLC ( hereinafter " loanDepot"), is reversed. loanDepot has a right of action and cause of action to assert its mortgage and contest the validity of the seizure and sale of the property located at 503 Jefferson Drive, Houma, LA 70360. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 1092; Shaw v. Hingle, 94- 1579 ( La. 1/ 17/ 95), 648 So. 2d 903 . Furthermore, the trial court' s October 2, 2020 judgment denying defendants', Blake and Remly Bergeron' s, request for a preliminary injunction is an interlocutory judgment and therefore is not a res judicata bar to loanDepot' s claims. See La. R. S. 13: 4231; Whalen v. Brinkmann, 258 So. 2d 145 , 146- 47 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 1972)( a judgment granting or denying a preliminary injunction is an interlocutory judgment and therefore cannot form the basis for a plea of res judicata). In light of loanDepot' s right and cause of action bring its claims, to we also find the trial court erred by granting plaintiff' s exception of nonconformity of the petition with the requirements of La. Code Civ. P. art. 891. Accordingly, the peremptory and dilatory exceptions filed by plaintiff are denied. As to the trial court' s dismissal of loanDepot' s writ of mandamus, the writ is denied. JEW WRC EW COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT at s, J -* DEPUTY LERK OF COURT FOR THE COURT