APPEAL
FROM CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, ORLEANS PARISH NO. 2016-11427,
DIVISION "D-12" Honorable Nakisha Ervin-Knott,
JUDGE
PRESTON L. HAYES MATTHEW A. SHERMAN PATRICK R. FOLLETTE
CHEHARDY, SHERMAN, WILLIAMS, MURRAY, RECILE, STAKELUM &
HAYES, L.L.P.and KIM M. BOYLE PHELPS DUNBAR LLP COUNSEL FOR
PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT
GREGORY W. KEHOE GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A.COUNSEL FOR
DEFENDANTS/APPELLEES
Court
composed of Chief Judge James F. McKay III, Judge Sandra
Cabrina Jenkins, Judge Dale N. Atkins
JAMES
F. MCKAY III CHIEF JUDGE
In this
case involving a failed purported joint business venture, the
plaintiff, Rick Sutton, appeals the trial court's
judgment maintaining the exceptions of no cause of action, no
right of action, and lack of personal jurisdiction in favor
of the defendants, Jack Adams, Charles Adams, and Polly Point
Imports Corporation, and the dismissal of his lawsuit. For
the following reasons, we affirm.
FACTS
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In June
of 2011, Rick Sutton and Jack Adams entered into some type of
business relationship regarding the operation/creation of an
upscale fine jewelry and art gallery to be located at 501
Royal Street in New Orleans. At this time, Mr. Sutton was
negotiating a buyout of his family's business, which had
operated as the Jack Sutton Company at 501 Royal Street for
over fifty years. Mr. Sutton and Mr. Adams formalized their
agreement through the formation of RJANO and Maison Royale,
LLC. RJANO was the entity that leased the property at 501
Royal Street and Maison Royale was the store that operated at
501 Royal and a subsidiary of RJANO. However, according to
Mr. Adams, Mr. Sutton was unable to satisfy the obligations
of the agreement and in September of 2012, Mr. Sutton agreed
to become a salaried employee. This point is disputed by Mr.
Sutton.
By
October of 2014, the relationship between Mr. Adams and Mr.
Sutton had deteriorated. Mr. Adams approached Mr. Sutton and
told him he was fired and threatened to have him arrested for
trespassing. Mr. Adams also changed the passwords on the
business's computers and removed Mr. Sutton's name
from the business's bank accounts, among other things.
Since
2014, Mr. Sutton and Mr. Adams have been locked in several
lawsuits in connection with their failed business venture. On
November 6, 2014, Mr. Sutton filed a petition for breach of
contract and damages, naming Mr. Adams, Maison Royale, and
RJANO as defendants.[1] On April 14, 2015, Mr. Sutton filed a
petition and rule to show cause against Mr. Adams and Maison
Royale for purportedly unpaid wages.[2] On May 20, 2015, Mr. Sutton
filed a petition for damages against Mr. Adams alleging that
Mr. Adams was liable to him for defamation and intentional
infliction of emotional distress.[3] On December 15, 2015, the
parties entered into a settlement agreement in open court,
whereby Mr. Sutton would buy out Mr. Adams's share of the
business for $2.8 million. Mr. Sutton filed a motion to set
aside the consent judgment, claiming that Mr. Adams did not
disclose all material information, namely, that Polly Point
Import Corporation, which is wholly owned by Mr. Adams, owned
a one percent interest in Maison Royale.
On
November 18, 2016, Mr. Sutton filed the underlying lawsuit in
the instant case against Jack Adams, Charles Adams and Polly
Point Imports. Charles Adams, a resident of New York and
father of Jack Adams, operated Cellini's, a jewelry store
in New York; Mr. Sutton believed that certain consignment
items from Cellini's ended up at a "fire sale"
at Maison Royale in December of 2015. Mr. Sutton filed an
amended petition on June 26, 2017. Mr. Sutton's original
and amended petitions set forth causes of action for 1)
violations of the Louisiana Racketeering Act (RICO); 2)
violations of the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act
(LUTPA); 3) fraud and misrepresentation; 4) breach of
fiduciary duty; and 5) detrimental reliance. On March 20,
2017, the defendants filed exceptions of no cause of action,
no right of action, vagueness, peremption and lack of
personal jurisdiction. These exceptions came on for hearing
on October 6, 2017. The trial court also heard brief argument
on the defendants' motion to transfer and consolidate.
On
October 6, 2017, after hearing argument, the trial court
orally granted relief to defendants. Specifically, the trial
court granted the peremptory exceptions of no cause of action
and no right of action concerning plaintiff's claims
under RICO.[4] The trial court also granted the
peremptory exceptions of no cause of action and no right of
action concerning plaintiff's claims under LUTPA. The
trial court did not rule on the defendants' exception of
peremption or their request for 'reasonable attorney fees
and costs" under LUTPA, La. R.S. 51:1405(A). Further,
the trial court granted the peremptory exception of no cause
of action concerning plaintiff's claims for fraud and
misrepresentation. The trial court also granted the
peremptory exceptions of no cause of action and no right of
action concerning plaintiff's claims for breach of
fiduciary duty. The trial court also granted the preliminary
exception of no cause of action concerning the
plaintiff's claims for detrimental reliance.
Additionally, the trial court granted the declinatory
exception of lack of personal jurisdiction as to Charles
Adams. The trial court denied the defendants' motion to
transfer and consolidate the case with case No. 2017-0390,
Division L. Finally, the trial court ordered that the
plaintiff, Rick Sutton, would not be afforded an opportunity
to amend his original petition and first amending and/or
supplemental petition for damages against the defendants
pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 934.
On
October 16, 2017, Mr. Sutton requested written reasons for
judgment. The trial court issued a final written judgment and
accompanying written reasons on October 25, 2017. ...