o'bell v fayard 2005
DESCRIPTION
O'Bell v Fayard 2005TRANSCRIPT
CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS
STATE OF LOUISIANA
N0:05- 1(o8q ERIC J. O'BELL
VERSUS
DIVISION:" "
.. " ....... ~ r:.f 5·. ,, co •· ··.~J-r' ~~h;,{•. 7~,·} r= ___, ~ . ··..Q.<"'-1 rn
CALVIN C. FAYARD, A.P.C., CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR., D. BLAYNE H~YCiJtT, 0 THE COCHRAN FIRM - NEW ORLEANS, PHILLIPS, MITCHELL, HONEYCU'P.'f &
REECH ----< ~
~ CIVIL DISTRICT COURT Jou,-1;,LED __ _
\ y(-{ rf-7 Reg. < 0 Receiµt 'I .i'i%i'i
402 CIVIL COURfS BUILDHl<i 4.21 L011JLA ltVENIJt
DEPUTY CLERK MEW OHLEANS, LA 70117 51}~-::;9'.!··91.00
,·n ((,A PETITION FOR DAMAGES <:ash In Glk~ 1 <,1 ... ~ __ ·.'.'h:i9,·.~_rr-'\_''.,_fo:o8 l/ Ca·;je ~: 200~ 7 689 .. J 1~ •
The petition of ERIC J. O'BELL, (hereinafter referred to as "Petitioh~;~?~:~~~§i;~~he ~ll 218
• '."J
2 .JUDGES SUPPL COtif' FUMO age of majority and resident of Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana, with reiipQcttreprefefils thllt: 18.:;o
201 1NOIG LEG FEE 1 " $ 10.00 $ 1.0. i)l)
I. ::::::::::::::: ~ ::::::: ::
The following are made Defendants herein:
::-:-::::::::::::::::;::
(a) CAL VIN C. FA YARD, JR., A.P.C., a law firm authorized to do and doingihnmirfl!Ssfo 0.00
the State of Louisiana;
(b) CALVIN C. FA YARD, a person over the age of majority and resident of Louisiana,
domiciled in the Parish of Orleans;
(c) D. BLAYNE HONEYCUTT, a person over the age of majority and resident of
Louisiana, domiciled in the Parish of Livingston;
( d) THE COCHRAN FIRM - New Orleans, Phillips, Mitchell, Honeycutt & Reech - a
now defunct joint venture, with its principal place of business in the Parish of Orleans. Defendants
Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. and D. Blayne Honeycutt were partners and principals of this failed venture.
2.
Defendants are liable unto Petitioner jointly, severally and in so lido, together with interest
and all costs of these proceedings for those amounts commensurate with the damages described
herein, for the acts described herein.
3.
Venue in this action is proper in Orleans Parish under Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure
Article 74, because the acts or omissions giving rise to this action occurred in the Parish of Orleans,
State of Louisiana, and defendants operated several law firms in the Parish of Orleans, including, but
not limited to a Fayard & Honeycutt, A.P.C., and the now defunct entity, The Cochran Firm -New
Orleans, Phillips, Mitchell, Honeycutt & Reech.
4.
Beginning on or around, June, 1993, Petitioner began employment with Calvin C. Fayard,
Jr., A.P.C. as an associate attorney. During the course of his employment with Calvin C. Fayard,
Jr., A.P.C., Petitioner worked on a variety of state and federal class action cases, all of which he
was expressly guaranteed "bonuses" by the Defendant, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. With the exception
of a court-ordered bonus on the initial litigation to which Petitioner was assigned, Defendant,
Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., failed and/or refused to bonus Petitioner.
5.
On or around June 30, 2000, Petitioner entered into a written class action employment
agreement with defendant, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A.P.C.
6.
On or around, July 25, 2000, Petitioner and Defendants, Calvin C. Fayard, A.P .C. and Calvin
C. Fayard, Jr. entered into an addendum agreement for the purpose of handling and the sharing of
fees involving Fen-Phen and Redux ("Diet Drug cases"). The agreement called for Petitioner to
receive a sum equal to one/third (1/3) of all attorneys' fees recovered by Calvin C. Fayard, A.P.C.
regarding Diet Drug cases.
7.
Upon information and belief, Defendant, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. breached the agreement by
failing to pay the agreed upon attorney fees by falsely representing and over-inflating to Petitioner
the referral agreements with other attorneys, thereby withholding from Petitioner the agreed upon
compensation of attorney fees.
8.
Petitioner has recently learned that Defendant, Calvin C. Fayard and his firm, Calvin C.
Fayard, A.P.C. represented additional diet-drug cases and failed to disclose and/or inform Plaintiff as
to the amount of fees received from these diet drug cases and Defendants have failed to pay
attorneys' fees owed to Petitioner under the agreement.
9.
Defendant, Calvin C. Fayard, improperly deducted additional attorney fees from Petitioner to
pay a bonus to at least one staff member, contrary to the terms of the agreement.
10.
On or about December 31, 2003, Petitioner terminated his employment as an attorney with
Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A.P.C.
11.
Following his separation from Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A.P.C., Petitioner requested all accrued
vacation time and sick leave benefits.
12.
On or around January, 2004, defendant, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A.P.C. forwarded a check to
petitioner, improperly representing that defendants had paid all accrued benefits to which plaintiff
was entitled.
13.
Petitioner has demanded payment from defendant, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A.P.C. of all
amounts due and owing to petitioner for his sick leave benefits and unused vacation time, and
defendant has refused to comply.
14.
Pursuant to La. R.S. 23 :632, petitioner is entitled to accrued sick leave time, unpaid vacation
time, plus the penalty of ninety days's wages and attorneys fees and costs.
15.
At approximately the same time Petitioner terminated his employment status with Calvin C.
Fayard, A.P.C, Petitioner entered into an agreement with defendants, Calvin C. Fayard and D. Blayne
Honeycutt to provide legal services to a newly formed entity, the now defunct Cochran Firm, New
Orleans, Phillips, Mitchell, Honeycutt & Reech.
16.
At all times relevant herein, this new entity was a partnership between the famed attorney,
Johnnie Cochran, and defendants, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. and D. Blayne Honeycutt. At all times
relevant herein, defendants, Fayard and Honeycutt made repeated and express guarantees to Plaintiff
including the following: that Petitioner would receive a fair and equitable division of incoming
-- -cases; that Defendants had retained ethics counsel to oversee the merger of the firms with the now
defunct Cochran Firm, New Orleans, Phillips, Mitchell, Honeycutt & Reech, to oversee all aspects of
the rules of ethics and professionalism, including but not limited to properly advertising, and client
disclosure; that defendants would fund the joint venture Cochran Firm properly; that defendants
would provide an advertising budget sufficient to gain a majority market share and equal the leading
advertising firms in the New Orleans market, including, but not limited to Morris Bart, P.L.C.; to
provide plaintiff with malpractice insurance for professional services rendered to the Cochran Firm.
17.
Defendants failed to meet all repeated and express guarantees relied upon by Petitioner in
deciding to agree to provide legal services to the Cochran Firm, New Orleans.
18.
On or around September, 2004, Petitioner learned that the Cochran Firm, Phillips, Mitchell,
Honeycutt & Reech had been dissolved. Petitioner requested information on the firm breakup and a
course of action from defendants, Fayard & Honeycutt and Defendants refused and/or failed to
provide Petitioner with information regarding the dissolution of the Cochran Firm.
19.
As a result of defendant, Fayard and Honeycutt's failure and/or refusal to take action, on or
around September, 2004, Petitioner retained ethics counsel and was advised to contact the clients he
was currently representing under the umbrella of the now defunct Cochran Firm, Phillips, Mitchell,
Honeycutt and Reech and advise clients accordingly.
20.
Petitioner advanced expenses to various cases, some of which defendants improperly seized,
and/or discharged without Petitioner's consent or knowledge and defendants' have refused and/or
failed to reimburse to Petitioner these expenses and pay attorneys' fees earned.
21.
Defendants' acts, in total disregard of the agreements between the parties, have caused
Petitioner significant financial damage and caused Petitioner to incur costs and expenses.
22.
On November, 2004, Petitioner presented defendants, Fayard and Honeycutt with a bill for
his professional legal services from January 1, 2004 to September, 2004 and Defendants have failed
to compensate petitioner for such legal services.
23.
Petitioner reserves any and all other rights which they have or may discover as a result of the
discovery to be had in these proceeding.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner, ERJC J. O'BELL, prays that Defendants, CAL VIN C. FAY ARD,
JR., CALVIN C. FAY ARD, A.P.C., AND D. BLAYNE HONEYCUTT, be served individually and
on behalf of the now defunct Cochran Firm New Orleans, Phillips, Mitchell Honeycutt & Reech,
with a copy of this petition as requested by Petitioner, and that Defendants be cited to appear and
answer within the delays allowed by law, and that after due proceedings, there be judgment in favor
of Petitioner and against Defendants, jointly, severally, and in solido for all damages indicated
hereinabove, together with interest from date of judicial demand, until paid, attorney's fees and for
all costs of their proceedings, and for all other general and equitable relief allowed by law.
PLEASE SERVE:
CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR., A.P.C. Through its agent for service of process: Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. 519 Florida Ave., S.W. Denham Springs, LA 70726
D .. BLAYNE HONEYCUTT 506 Florida Ave. SW. Denham Springs, LA 70726
CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR. 5 809 St. Charles Ave. New Orleans, LA
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
KAHN-GAUTHIER LAW GROUP, LLC
650 Poydras Street Suite 2150 New Orleans, LA 70130 (504) 455-1400 (504) 455-1498 (fax)
Attorney.for Petitioner
ATTORNEY'S NAME: AND ADDRESS:
Kahn, Lewis Stephen, 3500 N. Hullen St. Metairie LA
Esq. 23805
70002 R, r-· ,., ·- ' , r ,... "" , r.:. ,,,, ;: ; \ :::: u R r-c·' r.: 1 \.1 ,.... 0 ..... •-J'lft.:
CIVIL n1· 'I "I I 3 o " -, DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEAmll Jvl M Ii: -' 4 STATE OF LOUISIANA ZOJ5 JU'.J I 3 A / '.
Cl 111L ~!1.3;'.LF''' ,-·-r r.·
NO. 20 05-07689
O'BELL, ERIC J. vs.
FAYARD, CALVIN C.
1. __,,,L1-t"rt .... _r, .
ETAL
C I T A T I 0 N
TO: HONEYCUTT, D. BLAYNE 506 FLORIDA AVE. SW. DENHAM SPRINGS LA
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED:
You must either comply with the demand contained in the petition FOR DAMAGES a cert~ied copy of which accompanies this citation, or file an answer or other
>-legal leading in the office of the Clerk of this Court, Room 402, Civil Courts ~uildi aj 421 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, LA, within fifteen (15) days after the tj;ervic a;iereof under penalty of default.
u..fr* *C':;i * .. ~* **** *** * **** *** * ** * ** * * *** *** *** **** **** *** * * *** ***** * **** ***** * **** **** * 4 LI'"> ~~ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION * '.I~ ~e assistance is advisable. If you want a lawyer and can't find one, you * cl rQ:J ~l the New Orleans Lawyer Referral Service at 561-8828. This Referral *
~vi operates in conjunction with the New Orleans Bar Association. If you * '.:!:i ~li 1 you may be entitled to free legal assistance through the New Orleans * la.....rr L"e9al ~ssistance Corp.; you may call 529-1000 for more information. * !-"" COUR iJ?ERSONNEL ARE NOT PERMITTED TO GIVE LEGAL ADVICE. * C'l:i****** •************************************************************************** L&J c:i.
<-iN WITN SS HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affix the seal of The Civil Distric Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of LA June 10, 2005.
-a:: ;.o::
fie~ Room 402, Civil Courts Building Av~ue
IlA
DALE N. ATKINS, Clerk of The Civil D'strict Court for Pari h of Orleans State~J.f_.Ll'r--""\"-J
process servers '
w/i petition
Returned same day
.Deputy Sheriff of [r'v/,v5~J.,J
Mileage: $~~~~~~~~~-
~ ENTERED
SERI:1p~1--D=E=p=u=T=y~==-;~Q=p=e=I~S-H-
DOMICILIARY SERVICE
On this day of served a copy of the w/i petition
' FOR DAMAGES On HONEYCUTT, D. BLAYNE
by leaving same at the dwellinghouse, or usual place of abode, 506 FLORIDA AVE. SW. in the hands of a person of suitable age and discretion residing therein as a member of the domiciliary establishment, whose name and other facts connected with this service I learned by interrogating HIM I HER the said HONEYCUTT, D. Bh~YNE
being absent from the domicile at time of said service.
Returned same day
No.
Deputy Sheriff of
/JJ.60 ATTORNEY'S NAME: 23805 '·----. AND ADDRESS:
Kahn, Lewis St1-:,_ ·-.. / __ .,, ,__.. 3500 N. Hullen Bt. . ,,-,·.;·1·· Metairie LA ':10002 ·
CIVIL DISTRICT coURT Zubid~EI PAi<is~i 'ot boRLEANs STATE OF LOUISIANA
NO. 20 05-07689
O'BELL, ERIC J. vs.
FAYARD, CALVIN C.
SECTION: 07-E
ETAL
C I T A T I 0 N l{ECEIVEt TO: CALVIN C. FATARD, JR., A.P.C. THROUGH: ITS AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS
CALCIN C. FAYARD, JR. 519 FLORIDA AVE., S.W. DENHAM SPRINGS LA
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED:
JUN l 6 2005
Livingston P , Sheriff 0 ,,firish
II/Ce
You must either comply with the demand contained in the petition FOR DAMAGES a certified copy of which accompanies this citation, or tile an answer or other legal pleading in the office of the Clerk of this Court, Room 402, Civil Courts Building, 421 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, LA, within fifteen (15) days after the service hereof und~r penalty of default.
*********************************************************************************** * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION * * Legal assistance is advisable. If you want a lawyer and can't find one, you * * may call the New Orleans Lawyer Referral Service·at 561-8828. This Referral * * Service operates in conjunction with the New Orleans Bar Association. If you * * qualify, you may be entitled to free legal assistance through the New Orleans * *Legal Assistance Corp.; you may call 529-1000 for more information. * * COURT PERSONNEL ARE NOT PERMITTED TO GIVE LEGAL ADVICE. * ***********************************************************************************
IN WITNESS HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affix the seal of District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of LA June 10,
Clerk's Office, Room 402, Civil Courts Building 421 Loyola Avenue
DALE N. AT!'f.lN'f.'\. The Civil for the Pa State of New Orleans, LA
SHERIFF'S RETURN: (for use of proc;ss servers only)
~-S-O_N_AL--SE_R_V_I:_:~
On this J1 day of ::s\J N'2__ Qloo5 served a copy"""o"l£'""t""h"'e""°~w~;~i~p~e~t=i"t-i~o=n FOR DAMAGES On CALVIN C.
)
Returned same day,
lJ <;;-\-A 0 d e_ I' No. Go-'! Deputy Sheriff of [/v1°NjS...Jd,./'
ENTERED
DOMICILIARY
On this day of served a copy of the w/i petition
' FOR DAMAGES On CALVIN C. FATARD, JR., A.P.C.
through ITS AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS by leaving same at the dwellinghouse, or usual place of abode, CALCIN C. FAYARD, JR. 519 FLORIDA AVE., S.W. in the hands o a person of suitable age and discretion residing therein as a member of the domiciliary establishment, whose name and other facts connected with this service I learned by interrogating HIM / HER the said CALVIN c. FATARD, JR., A.P.C.
being absent from the domicile at time of said service.
Returned same day
No.
Deputy SheriffVERIFIED Constance Barley Deputy Clerk
,
ATTORNEY' s NAME: Kahn, Lewis s_ ·~phen, Esq. 213805 AND ADDRESS: 3500 N. Hullen St.
Metairie LA 72 1; 2 n ,.. ., ['- " r,... D •.:I" t ••.• , \..:- ::--•~ .,. , .... _ t v l:.
CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH O!'fu!JJ.i<J;J'i';l'{N~] f\ j j: 3 5 STATE OF LOUISIANA
NO. 20 05-07689 SECTION: 07-E
O'BELL, ERIC J. vs.
FAYARD, CALVIN C. ETAL
C I T A T I 0 N
?~E_ ,Ji iN 2 2 2005
TO: FAYARD, CALVIN C.
5'1)~L I NEW ORLEANS LA 5f ~~v-11-s f)ue_
JR.
5/q ({or ,'Jo._ l/v ri Uvingston Parish Sheriff Office
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED: ]) e-vi_ h_.a._ Wl <;;'-pr; '1-,j ~ /
You must either comply with the demand contained in the petition FOR DAMAGES a certified copy of which accompanies this citation, or tile an answer or other legal pleading in the office of the Clerk of this Court, Room 402, Civil Courts Building, 421 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, LA, within fifteen (15) days after the service hereof under penalty of default.
*********************************************************************************** * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION * Legal assistance is advisable. If you want a lawyer and can't find one, you *may call the New Orleans Lawyer Referral Service at 561-8828. This Referral * Service operates in conjunction with the New Orleans Bar Association. If you * qualify, you may be entitled to free legal assistance through the New Orleans *Legal Assistance Corp.; you may call 529-1000 for more information. * COURT PERSONNEL ARE NOT PERMITTED TO GIVE LEGAL ADVICE.
* * * * * * *
***********************************************************************************
IN WITNESS HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affix the seal of The Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of·LA June 10, 2005.
Clerk's Office, Room 402, Civil Courts Building 421 Loyola Avenue
DALE N. ATKINS, Clerk of The C'vil District Court for Paris of Orleans
New Orleans, LA State f
SHERIFF'S RETURN: (for use of process servers only)
c:Pi_R_S_O_N_A_L~;-E_R_V_I_C_E~~ , DOMICILIARY SERVICE
On this~ day of :SJl"Vf' ~~served a copy"""'o~f~t~fu~e~w7/ri~p~e~t"i"t~i7o~n FOR DAMAGES On FAYARD, CALVIN C. JR.
-1 in rrso"I { c "--... MQ.\"r-.10' A A""-i:,~,_.-t- S,,i C.)
Returned same day
Deputy Sheriff of Orleans Parish
Mileage: $
~~ ENTERED cl ER
SERIAL NO.~ /~?:?:~~ PARISH
On this day of served a copy of the w/i petition
' FOR DAMAGES On FAYARD, CALVIN C. JR.
by leaving same at the dwellinghouse, or usual place of abode, 5809 ST CHARLES AVE. in the hands o a person of suitable age and discretion residing therein as a member of the domiciliary establishment, whose name and other facts connected with this service I learned by interrogating HIM / HER the said FAYARD, CALVIN c. JR.
being absent from the domicile at time of said service.
Returned same day
No.
Deputy Sheriff of Orleans Parish
~' ,__ ~_ELVED DIV "E"
'Q/oS~ CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF OR.LEA.rs
· .. l l t. ) . ' -
NO.: 05-7689
STATE OF LOUISIANA
ERIC J. O'BELL
IUO'.i Jlli. - I A q: S2 DIVISION: "E"
DEFENDANTS' DECLINATORY EXCEPTIONS
NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes D. Blayne Honeycutt
("Honeycutt"), Calvin C. Fayard ("Fayard"), and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A Professional Corporation
("CF Law Firm")( collectively "defendants"), who by way of declinatory exceptions to plaintiffs CIVIL DISTRICT COURT
Petition for Damages ("Petition"), respectfully represent as follows:
DECLINATORY EXCEPTION OF LIS PENDENS
'\ell. (QIJWIS P,IJJt.DIHG <21 LOYOLA AVENUE
HEW ORLEAHS1 LA 70112 50<-592-9100
1. Re9. 0 1 Cash In Clk: 2 Case :: 2005 7689
Receiot : 363869 07/01/05 at 10:52 Cash b:!r ~ 2
Pursuant to La. Code ofCiv. Pro article 531, defendants raise the abclip~totyi~ij<Jf;r~IJ:" 30.00 ==:::========
!is pendens. For reasons more fully set forth in the accompanying memorandum,Ericj:"O~'i:ll's_ 30.00
("O'B JI" " I · ·ff') II t. · f h · d Check tA•ou~t $ 30.00 e or p amt! a ega 10ns anse out o t e same transact10n an occurrence as ·ne ract~========== Chan•• Due $ 0.00
underlying a lawsuit already pending in Livingston Parish filed by Honeycutt, Fayard, CF Law Firm
and Fayard & Honeycutt, A Professional Law Corporation ("F & H Law Firm") ("Livingston Parish
Lawsuit") against O'Bell. Thus, there are two or more suits pending between the same parties that
arise out of the same transaction and occurrence.
2.
O'Bell is required to assert each of the claims he alleges in this lawsuit as compulsory
reconventional demands to the claims alleged in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit pursuant to La. Code
ofCiv. Pro. article 1061(B).
3.
Thus, the declinatory exception oflis pendens should be granted and 0 'Bell's Petition should
be dismissed.
943!95_2 1
DECLINATORY EXCEPTION OF VENUE
4.
Defendants raise the declinatory exception of venue because venue is improper in the Parish
of Orleans.
5.
All of the claims O'Bell brings in this lawsuit are compulsory reconventional demands that
should have been brought in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit, and thus venue is proper in Livingston
Parish.
6.
O'Bell's statement that The Cochran Firm - New Orleans, Phillips, Mitchell, Honeycutt &
Reech ("the Cochran Firm") has its principal place of business in New Orleans should be ignored.
In his Petition, O'Bell alleges the Cochran Firm is "failed" and "now defunct." Further, O'Bell's
allegations regarding the Cochran firm arise from agreements he says were made with Fayard,
Honeycutt, and F & H Law Firm, all of whom are domiciled in Livingston Parish and parties to the
Livingston Parish Lawsuit.
7.
Fayard's domicile is in Livingston Parish, not Orleans Parish. Accordingly, O'Bell's
statement that Fayard is domiciled in the Parish of Orleans should be ignored.
8.
Venue is required to be in Livingston Parish where the law requires O'Bell's compulsory
counterclaims be brought. Thus, defendants' exception of venue should be granted, and this matter
should be dismissed, or alternatively, transferred to Livingston Parish where venue is proper.
RULE 9.8 STATEMENT
9.
In accordance with Uniform Rules of the Louisiana District Courts, Rule 9.8(a), defendants
hereby provide notice to this Court that they may offer testimony in support of these exceptions as
permitted by La. Code of Civ. Pro. articles 930 and 931, or as otherwise permitted by law.
Furthermore, defendants represent that this matter has not yet been set for trial.
943195_2 2
.. ~ l ... - ""•
WHEREFORE, Defendants, D. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayahi, ... .E, laiid Calvin C.
Fayard, Jr., A Professional Corporation pray that, after due proceed¥ftfll.l' :Jlit haf, t~irq!es1!1atory exceptions be granted, and the appropriate relief awarded.
CIVIL ,iSTRICT COURT
943195_2
Denham Springs, Louisiana 70726 Telephone: 225.664.0001 Facsimile: 225.664.9430
Donna V. Yelverton (#25310) Scott D. Huffstetler (#28615) KEAN, MILLER, HAWTHORNE, D' ARMOND, McCOW AN & JARMAN, L.L.P. One American Place, 22"a Floor Post Office Box 3513 (70821) Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70825 Telephone: 225.387.0999 Facsimile: 225.215.4037
Attorneys for Defendants, D. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayard, and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A Professional Law Corporation
3
4. CF Law Firm is liable for accrued sick leave time, unpaid vacation time, statutory penalties, attorneys' fees and costs under La. R.S. 23:632;5
5. Honeycutt, Fayard and the Cochran Firm are liable for breaching several alleged agreements regarding the formation of the now defunct Cochran Firm;6
6. Honeycutt is personally liable for failing to provide plaintiff with information about the dissolution of the now defunct Cochran Firm;7
7. All defendants are liable for failing to reimburse plaintiff for expenses that he allegedly advanced for various cases;8 and
8. Honeycutt and Fayard have failed to pay plaintiff for a bill he allegedly presented to them for legal services rendered from January 1, 2004 to September, 2004 (presumably, an open account);9
This lawsuit is not the only lawsuit pending between the parties. On or about April 7, 2005,
Honeycutt, Fayard, CF Law Firm and Fayard & Honeycutt, A Professional Law Corporation ("F & H
Law Firm") filed a Petition against O'Bell in the Twenty-First Judicial District Court, State of
Louisiana, Parish of Livingston ("Livingston Parish Lawsuit"). 10
943384_3
The Livingston Parish Lawsuit alleges that O'Bell is liable to:
1.
2.
3.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
CF Law Firm for taking client files without permission, failing and refusing to return files, and failing to account for legal fees and costs after completing his engagement with CF Law Firm;11
Honeycutt, Fayard, and F & H Law Firm for taking client files without permission, failing and refusing to return client files, and failing to account for costs and fees after completing his engagement with F & H Law Firm; 12
All plaintiffs for taking client files without permission, failing and refusing to deliver client files and failing to account for fees recovered and/or costs incurred in connection with his work done for F & H Law Firm whenever it was associated with
See Petition, if 14.
See Petition, 'lfif 15, 16, 17, 21 and 22. Interestingly, plaintiff makes no allegation that any of these important alleged agreements were ever reduced to writing.
See Petition, if 18.
See Petition, 'If 20.
See Petition, if 22.
D. Blane Honeycutt, et al. v. EricJ. O'Bel/, Suit No. 107548, Division "G," Twenty-First Judicial District Court, State of Louisiana, Parish of Livingston. A copy of the Petition in this lawsuit is attached as Exhibit "A." Also, O'Bell has filed a class action against, inter alia, Fayard and CF Law Firm under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. ("ERISA"). See Eric J. O'Bell, et al. v. Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A.P.L.C., et al., Civil Action 05-265-D-Ml, United States District Court, Middle District of Louisiana.
See Exhibit A, 'If 4.
See Exhibit A, if 5.
2
the Cochran Firm; 13 and
4. All plaintiffs for a full and complete accounting; 14
Plaintiffs in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit seek a judgment ordering O'Bell to account for
fees earned and costs incurred; declaring ownership of client files; and for all such sums due and
owing to each petitioner. 15
LAW AND ARGUMENT
I. DECLINATORY EXCEPTION OF LIS PENDENS
The claims that O'Bell brings in the current lawsuit ("Orleans Parish Lawsuit") are
compulsory counterclaims in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. These claims can only be brought in
the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. Accordingly, defendants raise the declinatory exception of !is
pen dens.
The facts 0 'Bell alleges in the Orleans Parish Lawsuit are so factually related to the facts
alleged in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit that O'Bell is actually required to bring these claims in the
Livingston Parish Lawsuit as acompulsoryreconventional demand. See La. Code ofCiv. Pro. article
1061(B). The Livingston Parish Lawsuit and the Orleans Parish Lawsuit involve the same
transaction or occurrence. The factual allegations in both lawsnits arise out of O'Bell's alleged
agreements with Honeycutt, Fayard, CF Law Firm and F & H Law Firm. Both lawsuits arise out of
wrongs the opposing parties allege occurred dnring and after O'Bell' s affiliation with CF Law Firm.
Likewise, both lawsuits arise out of wrongs the opposing parties allege occurred during, and as a
result of, 0 'Bell's continued affiliation with Honeycutt and Fayard after 0 'Bell's affiliation with CF
Law Firm ended.
In Hy-Octane Investments, Ltd. v. G&B Oil Products, Inc., 97-28 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/29/97),
702 So.2d 1057, the court held that an exception oflis pendens should be sustained when a plaintiff
brings claims in a current lawsuit that were required to be brought as a compulsory reconventional
demand in a pending action. In sustaining the exception of !is pendens, the court held that the
interrelation between res judicata and the compulsory reconventional demand required both litigants
to assert all causes of action that arise from the same transaction or occurrence in one lawsuit. Id.
13
14
15
943384_3
See Exhibit A, ~ 5.
See Exhibit A, ~ 6.
See Exhibit A, Prayer for Relief.
3
at 1060 quoting comment (a) to La. Code ofCiv. Pro. art. 1061. According to the court, the phrase
"transaction or occurrence," as used in the statutes on !is pendens, res judicata and compulsory
reconventional demands, means that "pertinent facts of different claims are so logically related that
issues of judicial economy and fairness mandate that all issues be tried in one suit." Id. at 1060.
Thus, the issue is not the nature of the actions (e.g., tort, contract, open account), but the
commonality of the facts that support the claims. See also, Glass v. Alton Ochsner Medical
Foundation, 2002-0412 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/6/02), 832 So.2d403, 411-412 (Byrnes, CJ., concurring).
Each claim O'Bell alleges in this lawsuit arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is
the subject matter of the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. All of his claims relate to grievances he has
regarding his affiliations with Honeycutt, Fayard, CF Law Firm and F & H Law Firm either as an
employee/attorney, or as a party to alleged agreements concerning attorneys' fees contracts and/or
the parties' association with the Cochran Firm. Although O'Bell has artificially crafted several
different forms to sue defendants, his claims add nothing new factually, but rely on the same facts
alleged in, and are substantially the same as the Livingston Parish Lawsuit.
The test for determining whether an exception oflis pendens should be granted is to inquire
whether a final judgment in the first suit would be res judicata in the later filed suit. Wells v.
Standard Mortg. Corp., 2002-1934 (La. App. 4 Cir. 719103), 865 So.2d 112, 115. The exception of
!is pendens has the same requirements as the exception ofres judicata. See e.g., La. R. S. 13:4231.
Thus, the exception oflis pendens should be sustained when the suits involve the same transaction
or occurrence between the same parties in the same capacities. Wells, 865 So.2d at 115. There are
three requirements for granting an exception oflis pendens: (1) there are two or more suits pending;
(2) the suits involve the same transaction or occurrence; and (3) the suits involve the same parties
in the same capacities. Id. See also, La. Code of Civ. Pro. article 531.
Here, there are two or more suits pending. With the exception of the alleged defunct Cochran
Firm, the defendants in this lawsuit are all plaintiffs in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. O'Bell was
served with process, made an appearance, and unsuccessfully asserted several exceptions on his
behalf in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit.
The Orleans Parish Lawsuit and the Livingston Parish Lawsuit also involve the same parties
in the same capacities. It does not matter that O'Bell added a new party, the Cochran Firm, and
deleted a party, F & H Law Firm, from the current lawsuit. Honeycutt, Fayard and CF Law Firm all
943384_3 4
...-----
are plaintiffs in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit, which requires O'Bell to assert the claims alleged in
the current lawsuit as compulsory reconventional demands in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. "It
makes no difference for a compulsory reconventional demand by a defendant if there are additional
parties involved." Hy-Octane, supra at 1061 [Ignoring the fact that the customer's successor was
a defendant in the first lawsuit, but not a plaintiff in the second lawsuit.].
The Fourth Circuit has recognized on several occasions that the filing of a new suit naming
new and additional parties will not defeat an exception oflis pendens. See Dean v. Delacroix Corp.,
2003-1352 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/27/03), 853 So.2d 769, 772; Fincher v. Ins. Corp. of America, 521
So.2d 488 (La.App. 4 Cir.1988); Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. of Connecticut v. Sewerage and Water Board
of New Orleans, 2001-0898 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/29/02), 820 So.2d 632; Building Engineering Services
Co. v. State, 441 So.2d417 (La.App. 4 Cir.1983). O'Bell, Honeycutt, Fayard and CF Law Firm are
all parties to the Livingston Parish lawsuit and this lawsuit, thus invoking the doctrine oflis pendens.
All three requirements for an exception oflis pendens to be granted are satisfied. Thus, the
Orleans Parish Lawsuit should be dismissed.
II. DECLINATORY EXCEPTION OF VENUE
In his Petition, O'Bell alleges that venue is proper in Orleans Parish pursuant to La. Code of
Civ. Pro. article 74 because the acts or omissions giving rise to this action occurred in Orleans
Parish. O'Bell further alleges that the defendants operated several law firms in Orleans Parish,
including, but not limited to F & H Law Firm, and the now defunct entity, the Cochran Firm. He
also attempts to secure venue in Orleans Parish by stating that the Cochran Firm's principal place
of business is in New Orleans and Fayard is domiciled in the Orleans Parish.
O'Bell's attempts to obtain venue in Orleans Parish is nothing more than forum shopping to
avoid these claims being heard in Livingston Parish. O'Bell filed an exception of venue in the
Livingston Parish Lawsuit (which has been denied) when the facts underlying that Petition clearly
show that venue is proper in Livingston Parish. When an action is brought in a court of improper
venue, the court may dismiss the action, or in the interest of justice transfer it to a court of proper
venue. La. Code of Civ. Pro. art. 121. O'Bell's claims should be dismissed, or in the alternative,
transferred to Livingston Parish.
First, all of the claims O'Bell brings in this lawsuit are compulsoryreconventional demands
in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. O'Bell cannot now bring these claims in Orleans Parish when such
5
claims are compulsory claims in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. The initial plaintiffs (Honeycutt,
Fayard and CF Law Firm) in the first-filed lawsuit chose the venue, and O'Bell is thus required to
assert his related claims there. Instead, O'Bell attempts to manipulate the operative facts in the
Livingston Parish Lawsuit to give Orleans Parish the appearance as the more appropriate venue.
However, Livingston Parish is the required venue, and any judgment in the Livingston Parish
Lawsuit would be res judicata to the Orleans Parish Lawsuit.
Most of the agreements and claims alleged in this lawsuit arise from agreements and work
done with Livingston Parish entities. O'Bell's first affiliation with the parties in this lawsuit was
with CF Law Firm, whose offices are in Livingston Parish. O'Bell's second affiliation with the
parties in this lawsuit was with F & H Law Firm, whose offices are also in Livingston Parish. It was
during O'Belt 's affiliation with F & H Law Firm that agreements were made that he would do work
at the Cochran Firm. Because this is where O'Bell did work for the defendants, it is not unjust for
venue to be in Livingston Parish.
Second, O'Bell allegations that certain defendants in this lawsuit are domiciled in Orleans
Parish are not correct. He states that defendant, the Cochran Firm is domiciled in Orleans Parish.
In the same breath, he also states in his Petition that this venture is "now defunct," and that Fayard
and Honeycutt were "partners and principals of this failed venture." 16 O'Bell is correct that the
Cochran Firm was a failed venture, and any potential plans Fayard and Honeycutt had for the
Cochran Firm never materialized. 0 'Bell alleges that he made agreements regarding the Cochran
Firm with Fayard, Honeycutt, and F & H Law Firm. He also alleges the Cochran Firm is "failed"
and "now defunct." Clearly, O'Bell's dispute is with Fayard, Honeycutt, and F & H Law Firm.
These parties are all domiciled in Livingston Parish, and in fact, are parties to the currently pending
Livingston Parish Lawsuit.
O'Bell also incorrectly alleges Fayard's domicile is in New Orleans. 17 Fayard is not
domiciled in Orleans Parish. A person's domicile is his principal establishment wherein he makes
his habitual residence and essentially consists of two elements, residence and intent to remain. See,
In re Succession of Vickers, 2004-0887 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/22/04), 891 So.2d 98, 104. The question
of domicile is one of intention as well as fact. There is a presumption against a change of domicile.
16
17
943384_3
See Petition,~ l(d).
See Petition, ~ I.
6
----~~
Where it appears domicile has been acquired in another place, the party seeking to show it has been
changed must overcome this legal presumption. To show such a change, one must come forth with
positive and satisfactory proof of establishment of a domicile as a matter of fact with the intention
of remaining in the new place and of abandoning the former domicile. Absent a declaration to
change domicile, proof of this intention depends upon circumstances. Id.
Fayard is domiciled in Livingston Parish, with minimal ties to Orleans Parish. Although
Fayard does stay at a home located at 5809 St. Charles Street in New Orleans, his primary residence
is in Denham Springs at 25470 Rearwood Court. This has beenFayard's primary residence for over
25 years. Additionally, Fayard has operated his primary businesses in Livingston Parish, spends
much of his time in Livingston Parish, and raised his children in Livingston Parish. The offices for
his two primary entities, CF Law Firm and F & H Law Firm, are located in Livingston Parish as well.
Fayard's primary residence is in, and always has been, in Livingston Parish. Fayard has never done
anything to illustrate an intent to change his domicile to Orleans Parish. In fact, Fayard, through his
attorneys, declared himself to be a Livingston Parish domiciliary in the Livingston Parish lawsuit. 18
Regardless of O'Bell's attempt to craft a Petition to achieve venue in Orleans Parish, the
compulsory claims must be made in the Livingston Parish Lawsuit. Thus, defendants' exception of
venue should be granted. This lawsuit should be dismissed, or alternatively, transferred to
Livingston Parish.
18
943384_3
See Exhibit A, paragraph preceding '\11.
7
,--- ---
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, defendants contend that, after due proceedings are had, judgment
should be rendered in their favor and against plaintiff sustaining these exceptions, dismissing the
Petition, and further granting all appropriate relief permitted by Louisiana law.
943384_3
A. Shelby Easterly, EASTERLY LAW 142 Del Norte Aven Denham Springs, Louisiana 70726 Telephone: 225.664.0001 Facsimile: 225.664.9430
Donna V. Yelverton (#25310) Scott D. Huffstetler ( #28615) KEAN, MILLER, HAWTHORNE, D' ARMOND, McCOW AN & JARMAN, L.L.P. One American Place, 22nd Floor Post Office Box 3513 (70821) Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70825 Telephone: 225.387.0999 Facsimile: 225.215.4037
Attorneys for Defendants, D. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayard, and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A Professional Law Corporation
8
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document has been mailed, postage
prepaid to the following:
943384_3
Lewis S. Kahn KAHN GAUTHIER LAW GROUP, L.L.C. 650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150 New Orleans, Louisiana 70130
Baton Rouge, Louisiana this A__
9
TWENTY-FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
ST ATE OF LOUISIANA
PARISH OF LIVINGSTON
D. BLAYNE HONEYCUTT, CALVIN C. FAY ARD, JR., FAYARD & HONEYCUTT, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION, AND CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR. (A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION)
VERSUS
ERIC J. O'BELL
NUMBER: 1 c I I'}/ y
PETITION
The petition ofD. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayard, residents and domiciliarics of the
Parish or Livingston, State of Louisiana, Fayard & Honeycutt, A Professional Law Corporation,
domiciled in the Parish of Livingston, State of Louisiana and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A Prolcssional
Law Corporation, domiciled in the Parish of Livingston. State of Louisiana respectrul\y represents:
I.
Petitioners, D. Blayne Honeycutt and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. are attorneys at law licensed tll
practice in the State ot'Louisiana. Petitioner, Fayard & Honeycutt, A Professional Law Corporation,
is a Louisiana corporation comprised of the individual plaintiffs and practices law in the Stale 01·
Louisiana. Petitioner, Calvin C. Fayard, .Ir. (A Professional Corporation), is a Louisiana corporation
comprised of Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. and practices law in the State of Louisiana.
2.
De!Cndant, Eric .I. O'Be\I, is a resident and domiciliary of the Parish or.Jelforson, State or
Louisiana and an attorney at law.
3.
Defendant is indebted to plaintiffs for an accounting of costs, advances and legal tees rrorn
a rnulti-yeat· professional association more fully set forth hereinat1er.
4.
Defendant contracted with Calvin C. Fayard. Jr. (A Professional Corporation) to provide
legal services to the corporation effective July 1, 2000, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
A, and a part of defendant's work or service was performed in Livingston Parish under the terms of
the contract, so as to make Livingston Parish a parish of proper venue pursuant to La. C.C P. Art.
76.1. Defendant has ceased such engagement, taking client files without permission and has Liilcd
and refused to return files and account for legal fees and costs arising from the engagement.
s
Defendant further was engaged and contracted as an attorney by Fayard & Honeycutt. /\
Professional Law Corporation effective on or about January 1, 2004, and a part of de !Cndant' s work
or service was performed in Livingston Parish under the terms of the contract. De!Cmlant's
engagement was severed on or about September 2004. Defendant thereafter took c I ient Ii \cs without
permission and has failed and refused to return client files and account for costs and !Ccs to
Plainti \Ts, D. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., and Fayard & Honeycutt,/\ Pro !Cssirn1a\ Law
Corporation. Fayard & Honeycutt, A Professional Law Corporation likewise associated with the
Cochran Finn - New Orleans and defendant performed professional services for plaintiffs during
such association following which defendant look client files without permission and has Cai led and
rcruscd to deliver client files and/or account for fees recovered and/or costs incurred.
6.
All plaintiffs are entitled to a full and complete accounting from defendant.
7.
Plaintiffs reserve any and all other rights which they have or may have or discover as the
result or any discovery to be had in these proceedings.
8. . J\li. _ \ A C\: 5 2
Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment against def endant~~r the fu 11 and true arnount or a 11 sums
due and owing as rnay be shown by any such accounting. C\\l\L R-'
11STR\C1 CO\J i
WHEREFORE PLAINTIFFS, D. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., Fayard &
Honeycutt, A Professional Law Corporation, and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. (A Pro fcssional Corporal ion)
pray lhal after due proceedings be had there be j udgrnent herein in favor of plaintiffs and against
delcndant, Eric .I. O'Bell, ordering an accounting for fees earned and costs incurred; declaring
ownership of client files; and for all such stuns as may be proven due and owing to each pctitirn1cr
Crom defendant as their interests may appear frorn the facts to be proved at trial.
Service inlonnation will be provided separately.
By Attorneys,
EASTERLY LAW OFFIC ~ (APLC)
Shelby Easterly, 142 Del Norte Av ue Denharn Springs, a. 7072(, Telephone: (225) 664-000 I Facsimile: (225) 664-9430
.1-:----
CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORL-f~ Q
STATE OF LOUISIANA ZOOS JUL - I A q: ~ 2
NO.: 05-7689 DIVISION: "E" Ci VIL
ERIC J. O'BELL [J/STRICT COUW1
VERSUS
CALVIN C. FAYARD, A.P.C., CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR., D. BLAYNE HONEYCUTT, THE COCHRAN FIRM- NEW ORLEANS,
PHILLIPS, MITCHELL, HONEYCUTT & REECH
RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
CONSIDERING THE FOREGOING:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff, Eric J. O'Bell, appear and show cause on
the j_\e_ day of ¥ , 2005, at -9-o'clockA_.m. in New Orleans, Louisiana,
why Defendants', D. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A
Professional Corporation, declinatory exceptions should not be granted.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED, this_ day oJ UL 11 2005 , 2005, in
~ Q~q,,J , Louisiana.
943195_2
DGE, RT FOR T· EANS
PAULA MORLA-S- MINUTE CLERK DIVISION "E" BY ORDER OF THE COURT
5
-lflf • ' llfll'llt ~Nl~D 0111 MINI.HES
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE !LED I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document. has been mailed, _postage
lUO'.J JUL - I A LJ: ::i 2 prepaid to the following:
Lewis S. Kahn
943195_2 4
CIVIL J!STHICT COUf\ !
CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS
STATE OF LOUISIAN'\;Ju~ 1
,_,, i :,
NO. 05-7689 DIVISION "E" i
ERIC J. O'BELL /. l' I, __
'' ·i-;· /('T :--. . : · ' ') ' I '. I '•·' I l ... __ : ;_.' 1
VERSUS
CALVIN C. FAYARD, A.P.C., CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR., BLAYNE HONEYCUTT, THE COCHRAN FIRM- NEW ORLEANS,
PHILLIPS, MITCHELL HONEYCUTT & REECH
PLAINTIFF'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS
NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes plaintiff, Eric J.
O'Bell, who respectfully represents:
1.
Plaintiff desires that the suit and all claims and demands herein be dismissed, with
prejudice, and with each party to bear its respective costs.
2.
Counsel for all Defendants has been contacted, and concurs in the dismissal of
this suit and all claims, with each party to bear its own costs.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that all claims be dismissed w·
each to bear its respective costs.
Lewis Kahn (#23805) KAHN GAUTHIER LAW GROUP, LLC 650 Poydras St., Ste. 2150 New Orleans, LA 70130 (504) 455-1400
Jay Harris, L.L.C. 133 Aspen Square, Suite B Denham Springs, LA 70726
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF 0¥-Jf~ Q
STATE OF LOUISIANA
NO. 05-7689
ERIC J. O'BELL
VERSUS
CALVIN C. FAYARD, A.P.C., CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR., D. BLAYNE HONEYCUTT, THE COCHRAN FIRM- NEW ORLEANS,
PHILLIPS, MITCHELL, HONEYCUTT & REECH
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' DECLINATORY EXCEPTIONS
MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT:
D. Blayne Honeycutt, Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. and Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., A Professional Law
Corporation (collectively, "defendants") submit this memorandum in support of defendants'
declinatory exceptions.
BACKGROUND
On or about June 9, 2005, Eric J. O'Bell ("plaintiff' or "O'Bell") filed a Petition for
Damages ("Petition"), alleging various causes of action for breach of contract, tort, reimbursement
and open account. D. Blayne Honeycutt ("Honeycutt"), Calvin C. Fayard, Jr. ("Fayard"), Calvin C.
Fayard, Jr., A Professional Law Corporation ("CF Law Firm") and The Cochran Firm - New
Orleans, Phillips, Mitchell, Honeycutt & Reech ("Cochran Firm") are the named defendants. 1
943384_3
O'Bell's allegations are:
1. Fayard and CF Law Firm are liable for breaching written class action employment agreements of June 30, 2000 and July 25, 2000;2
2. Fayard is personally liable for falsely representing referral agreements to plaintiff, failing to disclose fees received in certain cases, improperly deducting plaintiff's attorney's fees to give a staff member a bonus, and failing to provide plaintiff with information about the dissolution of the "now defunct" and "failed" Cochran Firm;'
3. CF Law Firm is liable for failing to disclose fees received in certain cases and improperly representing to plaintiff that it had paid all accrued benefits to which plaintiff was entitled after his employment with CF Law Firm was voluntarily terminated on December 31, 2003 ;4
See Petition, ~ 1.
2 See Petition,~~ 5,6,7,8, and 9.
3 See Petition, ~'1]7, 8, 9 and 18.
4 See Petition,~~ 8 and 12.
l
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion to Dismiss has
this day been placed in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, and addressed to all
counsel ofrecord.
New Orleans, Louisiana this lG_ day of February 200, .
Lewis Kahn
" .------...
CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS
STATE OF LOUISIANA
NO. 05-7689 DIVISION "E"
ERIC J. O'BELL
VERSUS
CALVIN C. FAYARD, A.P.C., CALVIN C. FAYARD, JR., D. BLAYNE HONEYCUTT, THE COCHRAN FIRM-NEW ORLEANS,
PHILLIPS, MITCHELL, HONEYCUTT& REECH
JUDGMENT
The unopposed motion to dismiss considered:
IT IS ORDERED that the captioned suit is dismissed, and all claims of all
parties be and the same are hereby dismissed, with prejudice, with each party to bear its
respective costs.
JUDGMENT READ RENDERED AND SIGNED at New Orleans,
Louisiana this !LfJ__day of \). Jh , 2006.
t:J:"R 1 7 ?OOI\
;: N 1 ~.\{tiJ 01'-l MINUTES
~ ~IVILSHERiF