JULIE B. HANLEY
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ANTHONY BENEDITTO, & GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY
Appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court In and for
the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Docket No.
C6347O4 Honorable Donald Johnson, Judge Presiding
Timothy J. Martinez Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for
Plaintiff/Appellant Julie B. Hanley
Kimberly Louper Wood Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for
Defendants/ Appellees Allstate Property & Casualty Co.
& Anthony Beneditto
Stephen Dale Cronin Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for
Defendant/ Appellee GEICO Indemnity Co.
BEFORE: WHIPPLE, CJ., McCLENDON AND HIGGINBOTHAM, JJ.
seeks review of a trial court judgment dismissing her claims
against a tortfeasor and his liability insurer on the basis
of prescription. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
B. Hanley, the plaintiff/appellant, was involved in an
automobile accident with Anthony Beneditto on August 1, 2013.
On October 30, 2014, Ms. Hanley filed suit seeking damages
for injuries she allegedly sustained in the accident, naming
Mr. Beneditto, Allstate Insurance Company in its capacity as
his liability insurer, and GEICO Indemnity Company in its
capacity as Ms. Hanley's uninsured/underinsured motorist
(UM) insurer, as defendants. The suit was filed in the 19th
Judicial District Court and bore docket number 634704.
August 4, 2017, Mr. Beneditto and Allstate Insurance Company
(hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to as
"Allstate") filed a peremptory exception raising
the objection of prescription. Allstate alleged that since
the accident occurred on August 1, 2013, but suit was not
filed until October 30, 2014, the action was prescribed on
its face against Mr. Beneditto and Allstate and the claims
against them should be dismissed with prejudice. Ms. Hanley
opposed Allstate's exception.
a hearing, the trial court took the matter under advisement.
Thereafter, the trial court signed a judgment on November 15,
2017, granting the exception of prescription and dismissing
Ms. Hanley's suit against Mr. Beneditto and Allstate with
prejudice, leaving only the claim against GEICO.
that her suit filed against her UM carrier approximately
fifteen months post-accident interrupted the prescriptive
period against Mr. Beneditto because he and the UM carrier
were solidary obligors, Ms. Hanley has appealed.
general rule, prescription statutes "are strictly
construed against prescription and in favor of the obligation
sought to be extinguished." Taranto v. Louisiana
Citizens Property Ins. Corp., 10-0105 (La. 3/15/11), 62
So.3d 721, 726. Ordinarily, the party urging prescription
bears the burden of proof at trial of the exception; however,
if the petition is prescribed on its face, the burden shifts
to the plaintiff to show the action is not prescribed.
Taranto, 62 So.3d at 726. When no
evidence is introduced at the exception hearing and no
material issues of fact are in dispute, the ...