WINDMILL CREEK NORTH - 1ST LAKE VERSUS MALAKIA GOWAN
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
WINDMILL CREEK NORTH - 1ST LAKE NO. 20-C-85 VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT MALAKIA GOWAN COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF LOUISIANA February 21, 2020 Susan Buchholz First Deputy Clerk IN RE MALAKIA GOWAN APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE FIRST PARISH COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE REBECCA M. OLIVIER, DIVISION "A", NUMBER 168-904 Panel composed of Judges Fredericka Homberg Wicker, Robert A. Chaisson, and Hans J. Liljeberg WRIT GRANTED Relator filed a petition for trial de novo after the Fifth Justice of the Peace Court issued a judgment of eviction on February 11, 2020. The petition for trial de novo was filed with the First Parish Court for the Parish of Jefferson on February 18, 2020, prior to execution of a writ of possession and within the fifteen day period for seeking trial de novo from a justice of the peace ruling. La. C.C.P. art. 4925(A). Relator’s application to proceed in forma pauperis was granted by the First Parish Court. Relator now seeks review of the First Parish Court’s requirement that a bond in the amount of $764 dollars be paid in order to stay the eviction prior to the new trial, which is currently set for March 3, 2020. Relator’s February rent was paid prior to the eviction proceedings. Relator’s landlord sought to evict her based on an alleged occupant in violation of the lease agreement. In her petition for trial de novo, Relator requested that the eviction be stayed and the new trial granted “conditioned upon petitioner posting her $764 rent into the court registry on a monthly basis to be exclusively used as rent payment, beginning March, 2020.” Because the purpose of a bond is to protect the appellee against damages he may sustain as a result of the appeal, and because we recognize that the damages typically contemplated in cases of eviction are the potential lost rents to the landlord while an appeal is pending, 429 Bourbon St., LLC v. RMDR Investments, Inc., 16-800 (La. App. 4 Cir. 11/15/17), 230 So.3d 256, 270, writ denied, 17-2054 (La. 2/2/18), 235 So.3d 1106, we find that, in light of Relator’s pauper status, to the extent that the trial court ordered Relator to post $764 immediately into the court registry as bond, we find that the trial court abused its discretion. The 20-C-85 landlord is unlikely to sustain any monetary damages while awaiting trial de novo in this case because the February rent has been paid, and the Relator has agreed to place the March rent into the court registry prior to the trial scheduled on March 3, 2020. We find this to be an acceptable alternative. Therefore, we vacate the lower court’s ruling, which conditioned the stay of the judgement of eviction upon the immediate posting of $764 rent into the registry of court, and instead order Relator to pay her rent into the registry of the court when it becomes due in March 2020. Gretna, Louisiana, this 21st day of February, 2020. FHW RAC HJL 2 SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT MARY E. LEGNON FREDERICKA H. WICKER CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK JUDE G. GRAVOIS MARC E. JOHNSON ROBERT A. CHAISSON SUSAN BUCHHOLZ STEPHEN J. WINDHORST HANS J. LILJEBERG FIFTH CIRCUIT JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053) JUDGES POST OFFICE BOX 489 GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 www.fifthcircuit.org FIRST DEPUTY CLERK MELISSA C. LEDET DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF (504) 376-1400 (504) 376-1498 FAX 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 02/21/2020 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: 20-C-85 E-NOTIFIED James C. Rather, Jr. (Respondent) MAILED Hannah Adams (Relator) Attorney at Law 1340 Poydras Street Suite 600 New Orleans, LA 70112
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
