Court Opinion

ID: 9858311
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:20:03.445068+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:53:54.044655
License: Public Domain

TATE, Justice
(concurring).
I subscribe entirely to the majority opinion. I might note, however, that the basic rationale is founded upon our 1960 Code of Civil Procedure.
By this code, Louisiana has adopted a system of “fact pleading”, by reason of which the pleadings need only allege the ultimate or material facts which constitute the basis for relief. La.C.C.P. Arts. 854, 891, 1003, 1004; McMahon, The Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, 21 La.L.Rev. 1 (1960).
Under this Louisiana system of fact pleading, all that is required of a plaintiff is that he allege the material facts constituting a cause of action. Article 854. The courts are required, in their judgment, to “grant the relief to which the party in whose favor it is rendered is entitled, even if the party has not demanded such relief in his pleadings and the latter contain no prayer for general and equitable relief.” C.C.P. Article 862.
The 1960 Code of Civil Procedure, which has as its aim ultimate and substantial justice rather than procedural technicality, C.C.P. Article 865, sought to suppress “the harsh and unduly technical 'theory of the case’ doctrine in Louisiana, under which the litigant must select a theory of his case or defense and adhere to it throughout the litigation.” C.C.P. Article 862, Comment b.
In cases such as this one, a plaintiff who pleads and proves the necessary facts should be allowed to recover under any available theory, whether tort, quasi contract, or contract. To bar recovery simply by strictly construing the pleadings is to abandon the spirit of the 1960 Code of Civil Procedure.
The facts here pleaded can be construed as stating an action for breach of contract. Our majority correctly does so, since to construe them as alleging a tort action would cause this suit to be prescribed.
Nevertheless, if the issue were whether these allegations stated a tort action (e. g., for purposes of justifying the venue selected, or for purposes of justifying a tort recovery under a timely-filed tort suit against a liability insurer), then — liberally construed in favor of the pleader as the Code requires — the allegations of fact also justify construing the pleadings as stating a tort action. The better view of our Louisiana jurisprudence is that the plaintiff retains the right of election between concurrent remedies, when the facts pleaded *519justify either. Cf., Prescription, Classification and Concurrence of Obligations, 36 Tul.L.Rev. 556 (1962).
The whole thrust of our Code of Civil Procedure is to permit the courts to render substantive justice on the basis of facts pleaded, and to refuse to permit a denial of substantive rights (where the party has timely filed pleadings alleging the factual basis of his claim) because of technical defects of language or of some mechanical "theory-of-the-case” characterization defeating a recovery otherwise allowable under the facts pleaded. La.C.C.P. Arts. 862, 865, 2164, 5051.
The majority opinion illustrates the application of these principles. I fully concur in it.