Opinion

Alexander v. La. State Board of Private Investigator Examiners

  • 211 So. 3d 544
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Filed
Feb 17, 2017
Status
Published
Author
McKay
On the bench
Belsome, III, Jenkins, Ledet, Lobrano, McKay
Cited by
20 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.5%

holding that a party failed to preserve its right to raise on appeal the trial court’s ex parte communication with jury by failing to object at trial

How later courts described this case

  • holding that a party failed to preserve its right to raise on appeal the trial court’s ex parte communication with jury by failing to object at trial
  • upholding a jury’s award for $300,000 in general damages for defamation when a state regulatory board falsely accused the plaintiff of working as a private investigator without the proper license

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

McKAY, C.J.,

CONCURS IN THE RESULT

|¶1 concur in the result reached by the majority (i.e. the award of damages) but disagree with the majority’s finding that some of Mr. Alexander’s claims had prescribed.

Mr. Alexander has maintained throughout his pleadings and the case he put on at trial that there was some type of systematic effort engaged in by Mr. Englade and the Louisiana State Board of Private Investigator Examiners to deprive him of his private investigator license and his livelihood. These efforts even continued at trial where Mr. Alexander alleges that Mr. En-glade perjured himself to accomplish those ends. Therefore, a serious argument can be made that the tortious actions against Mr. Alexander were ongoing and the whole series of actions from the beginning can be viewed as a continuous tort.

Under Louisiana tort doctrine, when tortious conduct and resulting damages continue, prescription does not begin until conduct causing the damage is abated. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. Williamson, (W.D. La. 1997) 986 F. Supp. 409 , affirmed in part, vacated in part, 224 F.3d 425 (5th Cir. 2000). Statute establishing prescription of one year on delictual actions, like all prescription statutes, is strictly construed against prescription and in favor of maintaining cause of action. Paragon Development Group, Inc. v. Skeins, 96-2125 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/19/97) , 700 So.2d 1279 . Accordingly, I would find that Mr. Alexander’s case had not prescribed.

LOBRANO, J., CONCURS IN THE RESULT.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.