A Louisiana appellate court has vacated a lower court's decision to enforce a settlement agreement in a personal injury case, citing procedural errors. Ronald Wilson filed the complaint against Felipe’s Ventures, LLC and Hanover American Insurance Company in the Civil District Court of Orleans Parish on June 18, 2021. The appeal was decided on December 27, 2024.
The case revolves around an incident that occurred on July 27, 2020, when Ronald Wilson allegedly sustained injuries after a bench collapsed at Felipe’s restaurant. Wilson initiated legal proceedings by filing a petition for damages in June 2021. Mediation took place on August 16, 2023, but disputes arose regarding whether Wilson had accepted a settlement offer from Felipe’s during this process. On October 13, 2023, Felipe’s filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. Wilson contested this motion, arguing that he neither accepted the settlement nor authorized his former attorney to agree to its terms.
A hearing initially scheduled for November 30, 2023, was postponed and eventually canceled due to an ongoing jury trial in the district court's division. The district court decided the matter based solely on written briefs without conducting a hearing. On January 29, 2024, it granted Felipe’s motion to enforce the settlement and ordered that the proceeds be held in the court registry pending resolution of attorney fee claims by Wilson's former counsel.
Wilson appealed this decision on grounds that no contradictory hearing took place—a procedural requirement under Louisiana law for contested motions like enforcement of settlements. The appellate court found merit in Wilson's argument and noted that the district court committed procedural and legal errors by not holding such a hearing. According to Louisiana Civil Code Article 963(B), any motion requiring supporting proof must be tried contradictorily with the adverse party unless agreed otherwise by all parties involved.
The appellate court emphasized that rulings must be based on evidence properly introduced into the record during hearings where parties have opportunities to present their positions fully. It cited previous cases reinforcing this principle and concluded that without conducting a contradictory hearing or obtaining consent from both parties to decide based on briefs alone, the district court overstepped its authority.
Consequently, due to these procedural oversights and lack of evidentiary basis for its ruling—given no formal introduction or admission of evidence—the appellate court vacated the January judgment enforcing settlement between Ronald Wilson and Felipe’s Ventures LLC & Hanover American Insurance Company while remanding it back for further proceedings consistent with proper legal standards.
Representing Ronald Wilson is Pius A. Obioha from Law Offices of Pius A. Obioha & Associates LLC; John E Unsworth III represents defendants through Law Offices Of Robert D Ford; Honorable Jennifer M Medley presided over initial proceedings before Judges Joy Cossich Lobrano Rosemary Ledet Rachael D Johnson reviewed appeals under Case ID No:2024-CA-0363