# Williams v. Orleans Levee District & Its Board of Commissioners

> Louisiana Court of Appeal · November 4, 2009 · 24 So. 3d 307

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656251

## Case

- **Full name:** Ulysses WILLIAMS v. the ORLEANS LEVEE DISTRICT AND ITS BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, Jim Huey, Individually, and in His Capacity as President of the Board of Commissioners of the Orleans Levee District, Patricia Harris, Individually, and in Her Capacity as a Member of the Board of Commissioners, Gary Benoit, Individually, and in His Capacity as Acting General Counsel for the Orleans Levee District and ABC Insurance Company; Ulysses Williams v. the Orleans Levee District and Its Board of Commissioners, Jim Huey, Individually, and in His Capacity as President of the Board of Commissioners of the Orleans Levee District, Patricia Harris, Individually, and in Her Capacity as a Member of the Board of Commissioners, Et Al.; Ulysses Williams v. Board of Commissioners, Orleans Levee District
- **Court:** Louisiana Court of Appeal
- **Decided:** November 4, 2009
- **Citations:** 24 So. 3d 307; 2009 La. App. LEXIS 1899; 2009 WL 3677700
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Murray
- **Judges:** Murray, Kirby, Love
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed in part, on other grounds by Williams v. Orleans Levee District, 31 So. 3d 1048 (2010).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656251

## Opinion text

MURRAY, J.,
concurs with reasons.
| ^though I agree with the result the majority reaches, I write separately to address the issue of the State’s exception of res judicata. The State’s exception is based on the doctrine of virtual represen *315 tation, a federal court concept the Louisiana Supreme Court applied in Forum for Equality PAC v. McKeithen, 04-2551 (La.1/19/05), 893 So.2d 738 . Distinguishing this case on the facts from McKeithen, supra, the majority finds the virtual representation doctrine does not apply.
Subsequent to the decision in the McKeithen case, the United States Supreme Court in Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880 , 128 S.Ct. 2161 , 171 L.Ed.2d 155 (2008), disapproved the doctrine of preclusion by virtual representation. The Supreme Court held that “[t]he preclusive effects of a judgment in a federal-question case decided by a federal court should instead be determined according to the established grounds for nonparty preclusion.” Sturgell , 553 U.S. at -, 128 S.Ct. at 2178 . It is therefore unnecessary to reach the issue of whether the disapproved doctrine of preclusion by virtual representation applies. Since the State (a nonparty to the prior litigation) has cited no other basis for finding res judicata applies, the trial court correctly denied its exception.
For these reasons, I concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656251. Public record. Not legal advice.