Court Opinion

ID: 9952527
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-19 21:07:32.754922+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:40:06.021196
License: Public Domain

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

                                     STATE OF LOUISIANA

                                       COURT OF APPEAL

                                         FIRST CIRCUIT

A   I J Irl
                                              2022 CA 0979

                                     SHERMA.N WILLIAMS

                                                VERSUS

              ANALYTIC STRESS RELIEVING, INC. AND CF INDUSTRIES
                                        NITROGEN, LLC.

                                      DATE OF JUDGMENT.                 MAR 13 2024

              ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
                      PARISH OF ASCENSION, STATE OF LOUISIANA
                                    NUMBER 118417, DIVISION C

                     HONORABLE KATHERINE TESS STROMBERG, JUDGE

         Robert Campbell                                 Counsel for Plaintiff A
                                                                               - ppellee
         Baton Rouge, Louisiana                          Sherman Williams

         Malcolm J. Dugas, Jr.
         Gonzales, Louisiana

         Ernest Paul Gieger, Jr.                      Counsel for Defendant -Appellant
         John E. W. Baay, I1                             Analytic Stress Relieving, Inc.
         Morgan A. Druhan
         New Orleans, Louisiana

         F. Dominic Amato                             Counsel for Intervenor -Appellee
         Denham Springs, Louisiana                    Apache Industrial Services, Inc.

              BEFORE:   McCLENDON, THERIOT, CHUTZ, WOLFE, AND HESTER, JJ.
         Disposition. MOTION   TO   DISMISS    GRANTED    AND    APPEAL    DISMISSED.      ANSWER
         DISMISSED.
CHUTZ, J.

      Defendant -appellant, Analytic Stress Relieving, Inc. ( ASR), appeals the trial

court' s judgment, granting in part a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict

 JNOV) raised by plaintiff a- ppellee, Sherman Williams. Williams filed an answer to

the appeal that he wished to have the court consider in the event it "reverses the trial

court' s Wiling on the motion for [JNOV]."

      Prior to oral argument before the fivejudge panel, ASR advised the court that

the matter had settled. In a letter signed by counsel for both ASR and Williams, the

parties jointly withdrew their request for oral argument noting, " We have resolved this

matter with [Williams), via settlement this morning." The letter also stated that counsel

for both Williams and ASR " have signed this letter ... confirming our settlement"

ASR subsequently filed a motion to dismiss its appeal. Williams also sent

correspondence stating that he had no objection to the motion to dismiss. Accordingly,
the motion to dismiss is granted and ASR' s appeal is dismissed.

      Because this court did not reverse the trial court' s ruling on its JNOV grant, the

answer is moot. See Cat' s Meow, Ina a City ofNew Orleans, 98- 0601 ( La. 10/ 20/98),

720 So.2d 1. 186, 1193 (" A case is ` moot' when a rendered judgment or decree can

serve no useful purpose and give no practical relief or effect").      Accordingly, we

dismiss the answer.

                                       DECREE

      For these reasons, we grant ASR' s motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal.

The answer is dismissed. Each party is to bear their own costs.

      MOTION        TO   DISMISS      GRANTED        AND     APPEAL       DISMISSED.

ANSWER DISMSSED.

                                             2