HAROLD FILS Vs. STARR INDEMNITY AND LIABILITY

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT CA 18-756 HAROLD FILS VERSUS STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL. ********** APPEAL FROM THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. C20154212 HONORABLE MARILYN CARR CASTLE, DISTRICT JUDGE ********** BILLY H. EZELL JUDGE ********** Court composed of Billy H. Ezell, John E. Conery, and Van H. Kyzar, Judges. APPEAL DISMISSED. Brenda Sibille Piccione Piccione & Piccione Post Office Box 3029 Lafayette, LA 70502-3029 (337) 233-9030 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT: Harold Fils Barton Willis Bernard Carl Joseph Rachal K. Nicole Reynolds Bart Bernard Personal Injury Lawyers 1031 Camellia Blvd. Lafayette, LA 70508 (337) 989-2278 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT: Harold Fils Aaron Broussard Broussard & Hart, LLC 1301 Common Street Lake Charles, LA 70601 (337) 439-2450 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT: Harold Fils David Scott Rainwater Rachel L. Kovach J. Jacob Chapman Taylor, Wellons, Politz & Duhe, APLC 8550 United Plaza Boulevard, Suite 101 Baton Rouge, LA 70809 (225) 387-9888 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS/APPELLEES: Starr Indemnity & Liability Insurance Company Bis Salamis, Inc. Bilfinger Salamis, Inc. EZELL, Judge. This court, on its own motion, issued a rule to Plaintiff-Appellant, Harold Fils, to show cause why the appeal in the above captioned case should not be dismissed as having been taken from a partial judgment that has not been designated a final judgment under La.Code Civ.P. art. 1915(B). For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the appeal. The Plaintiff filed suit against Defendants-Appellees, Starr Indemnity & Liability Insurance Company; Bis Salamis, Inc.; and Bilfinger Salamis, Inc., for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. In Plaintiff’s third amended petition for damages, he asserted additional bad faith claims. In response, Defendants filed an exception of res judicata. On May 29, 2018, the trial court sustained the exception and dismissed the Plaintiff’s bad faith claims with prejudice. In response to the rule, Plaintiff acknowledges that a writ application involving the exact issue was simultaneously filed at the time of this appeal, bearing this court’s docket number 18-618, and that the instant appeal was filed in an abundance of caution. We find that the ruling at issue is a partial judgment that has not been designated a final judgment under La.Code Civ.P. art. 1915(B). Accordingly, we hereby dismiss the instant appeal without prejudice at Plaintiff’s cost. APPEAL DISMISSED. THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. Rule 2-16.3 Uniform Rules, Courts of Appeal.