Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

L.L.C. v. Burger

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, First Circuit

May 29, 2018

RADCLIFFE 10, L.L.C.
v.
LYNDA O. BURGER AND LAUREN E. WARREN

          On Appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Docket Number C590185, Sec. 23 Honorable William A. Morvant, Judge Presiding

          Joseph L. McReynolds Raymond C. Lewis New Orleans, Louisiana And Ross Dooley Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Defendants/ Appellants Lynda 0. Burger and Lauren E. Warren

          Craig J. Robichaux Mandeville, Louisiana And Alicia M. Bendana Mark S. Goldstein New Orleans, Louisiana Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee Radcliffe 10, L. L.C.

          BEFORE: McCLENDON, WELCH, AND THE RIOT, JJ.

          McCLENDON, J.

         Appellants, Lynda 0. Burger and Lauren E. Warren, seek reversal of a partial summary judgment that rendered Ms. Burger personally liable to Radcliffe 10, L.L.C. for the full amount of $150, 000.00. This judgment was based on the determination that Ms. Burger had "disposed" of $150, 000.00 in former community property in violation of LSA-C.C. art. 2357. The trial court certified the partial summary judgment as final under LSA-C.C.P. art. 1915B. For the following reasons, we conclude that the judgment was improvidently designated as final and dismiss the appeal.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         This litigation has its roots in the sale of the assets of Zip Tube Systems of Louisiana, Inc. - a corporation in which Ronald G. Burger and Ms. Burger owned equal shares of stock - to Radcliffe 10, a limited liability company that James Radcliffe formed in 2002 specifically to purchase Zip Tube's assets and business operations. This court has issued prior opinions in that litigation. See Radcliffe 10, L.L.C. v. Zip Tube Systems of Louisiana, Inc., 07-1801, 07-1802 (La.App. 1 Cir. 8/29/08), 998 So.2d 107, amended on rehearing, 07-1801, 07-1802 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/3/08), 22 So.3d 178, writs denied, 09-0011, 09-0024 (La. 3/13/09), 5 So.3d 119, 120; Radcliffe 10, L.L.C. v. Zip Tube Systems of Louisiana, Inc., 09-0417, 09-0418 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/29/09), 30 So.3d 825, writ denied, 10-0244 (La. 4/9/10), 31 So.3d 394. Effectively, Radcliffe 10 is a judgment creditor of Zip Tube, Burger Engineering, L.L.C, Ronald Burger, and Bryan Burger based on a final judgment for an amount in excess of $3, 428, 000.00.

         On June 5, 2009, Radcliffe 10 filed the underlying "Petition for Money Judgment Based on Disposal of Community Property, For Revocatory Action, and To Seize Community Property to Satisfy Community Debt, " naming Ms. Burger and her daughter, Lauren E. Warren, as defendants. Radcliffe 10 alleged that Ms. Burger donated former community funds - $150, 000.00 from a certificate of deposit and an additional $55, 765.08 in other funds - to her daughter. Radcliffe 10 sought a money judgment against Ms. Burger in the total amount of $205, 765.08, plus legal interest from the date of those dispositions, in addition to costs and any and all applicable attorney's fees.

         Ms. Burger filed an answer, generally denying many of the allegations in Radcliffe's petition. Ms. Burger also denied having made any donations to her daughter. Further, she asserted that any judgment rendered against Mr. Burger was not a community obligation.

         During the underlying litigation, the Burgers sought a matrimonial agreement terminating their legal property regime and establishing a separate property regime. The matrimonial agreement and the judgment approving the matrimonial agreement were entered into and signed after Radcliffe 10's $3, 428, 000.00 judgment was rendered against Mr. Burger and the other defendants, but before Radcliffe 10's judgment was signed by the trial court. Thereafter, Radcliffe 10 filed suit to revoke the judgment approving the Burgers' matrimonial agreement as an absolute nullity. The trial court revoked the Burgers' judgment as void ab initio for failure to follow the procedural requirements of LSA-C.C. art. 2329. In a per cur/am opinion, this court upheld the trial court's judgment. See Radcliffe 10, L.L.C. v. Burger, 14-0347 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/28/16), 191 So.3d 79 (per cur/am), writ granted, 16-00768 (La. 9/6/16), 204 So.3d 998, and rev'd, 16-0768 (La. 1/25/17), 219 So.3d 296.

         After the Louisiana Supreme Court granted the Burgers' writ application to settle the question of nullity of a separation of property agreement the Burgers had entered, but before the supreme court ruled, Radcliffe 10 filed a motion for partial summary judgment.[1] In that motion, Radcliffe 10 alleged that Ms. Burger took $150, 000.00 in community property and disposed of it by acquiring an undivided interest in real estate in East Baton Rouge Parish. In its statement of uncontested facts, Radcliffe 10 asserted:

On August 8, 2008, [Ms.] Burger purchased an undivided interest in a home located at municipal address 306 Pecan Meadow Drive, Baton Rouge, LA;
[Ms.] Burger's interest was purchased for $205, 765.08. Of that amount, [Ms.] Burger judicially confessed that $150, 000.00 was property of the former community between her and Ronald Burger. The remainder, $55, 765.08, is presumed to be community. La. C.C. ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.