You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Wynnco Construction LLC v. Bergeron

Citations: 136 So. 3d 823; 2013 La.App. 1 Cir. 0250; 2013 La. App. LEXIS 2255; 2013 WL 5883735Docket: No. 2013 CA 0250

Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; November 3, 2013; Louisiana; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves Wynnco Construction, L.L.C. appealing a district court judgment denying its motion for a judgment pro confesso in a garnishment proceeding against Level Construction and Development, L.L.C., the employer of judgment debtor Jennifer Bergeron. Wynnco sought garnishment of Bergeron's wages after obtaining a judgment for $18,261.24 plus interest. Garnishment interrogatories were served on Level, which responded before Wynnco moved for judgment pro confesso. Despite Wynnco's contention of a delayed response, the court found Level's actions compliant and denied the motion, but awarded $1,000 in attorney fees to Wynnco. Level appealed this fee award. The procedural rules under Louisiana Civil Procedure articles 2411-2417 were central, requiring timely responses to garnishment interrogatories and allowing for a contradictory hearing. The district court's denial was based on Level's evidence of compliance and payment. Furthermore, Bergeron's bankruptcy filing imposed an automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362, impacting the case's progression. The court's decision was upheld, with costs split between the parties, and Level's motion for a new trial was denied.

Legal Issues Addressed

Awarding Attorney Fees in Garnishment

Application: Despite denying the judgment pro confesso, the court awarded $1,000 in attorney fees to Wynnco, as mandated by Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 2413(C).

Reasoning: The district court correctly deny Wynnco’s motion for judgment pro confesso and to award reasonable attorney fees to Wynnco associated with that motion, in accordance with La. C.C.P. art. 2413(C).

Contradictory Hearing Requirement

Application: The case illustrates the necessity of a contradictory hearing in garnishment proceedings, allowing the garnishee to present evidence and potentially avoid a judgment pro confesso.

Reasoning: A contradictory hearing is mandated for motions involving garnishment, allowing the garnishee to present evidence regarding the indebtedness, employment status of the debtor, and other pertinent facts.

Garnishment Procedure under Louisiana Law

Application: The case discusses the process for garnishment in Louisiana, emphasizing the requirement for a garnishee to respond to interrogatories within fifteen days, and the subsequent steps if they do not comply.

Reasoning: Under Louisiana law, garnishment allows creditors to seize a debtor's property held by a third party. The process is governed by Civil Procedure articles 2411-2417, which require the garnishee to respond to interrogatories within fifteen days.

Impact of Bankruptcy Filing on Garnishment Actions

Application: The initiation of a bankruptcy proceeding by the debtor triggered an automatic stay under federal law, affecting enforcement actions.

Reasoning: Subsequently, on June 18, 2012, Jennifer and Claude Bergeron initiated a bankruptcy proceeding, triggering an automatic stay on actions to enforce or collect judgments against Jennifer's estate under 11 U.S.C. § 362.

Judgment Pro Confesso in Garnishment Proceedings

Application: The court denied Wynnco's motion for judgment pro confesso, concluding that Level had complied with procedural requirements by submitting timely answers and demonstrating payment of garnished wages.

Reasoning: The district court concluded that Level had substantially complied with procedural requirements, leading to the denial of the judgment pro confesso, not due to an automatic stay but because of Level's timely answers and payments made under the garnishment.