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.

Loston v. St. Mary Parish Sheriff's Office

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lafayette Division

April 5, 2019

KE'VON TRAMAR LOSTON
v.
ST. MARY PARISH SHERIFF'S OFFICE, ET AL.

          PATRICK J. HANNA JUDGE.

          RULING

          TERRY A. DOUGHTY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Pending before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 59] filed by Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”). Allstate moves the Court for a declaration that it does not provide insurance coverage for the claims asserted by Plaintiff Ke'von Loston (“Loston”) against Defendant Richelle Bowman (“Bowman”) and that it does not have a duty or a contractual obligation to provide legal representation or a defense to the claims asserted by Loston.

         On September 25, 2018, Loston filed a response [Doc. No. 78] indicating that he did not oppose the Motion for Summary Judgment. Bowman filed a Memorandum in Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 98].

         For the following reasons, Allstate's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

         I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On or about July 2, 2015, Loston was arrested by the St. Mary Parish's Sheriff's Office for the crime of larceny or theft of an ATV. However, the charges were later dismissed.

         The stolen ATV 4-wheeler belonged to Bowman's son. Loston alleges that, subsequent to his arrest, Bowman posted a photograph of him on Facebook and stated that he was the “thug” who stole her son's ATV.

         On June 15, 2016, Loston brought suit in the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette Division, asserting claims against the St. Mary Parish Sheriff's Office, Sheriff Mark A. Hebert, Sheriff Deputy Sennet Wiggins, Sheriff Deputy Beau Martin (collectively “the Sheriff's Office Defendants”), and Bowman. Loston alleges that the Sheriff's Office Defendants, operating under the color of law, wrongfully abused the judicial process to have him arrested and subsequently jailed for felony theft of an ATV. Loston further alleges that Bowman publicly defamed him by “circulating false allegations on social media resulting in thousands of views by persons in the community and beyond.” [Doc. No. 1, ¶ 7].

         Loston further alleges that, “[a]s a direct result of Defendants' misconduct, which resulted in Plaintiff's wrongful arrest, and detention, Plaintiff sustained substantial damages, including, but not necessarily limited to, mental and psychological anguish, and lost wages during and after the period of detention.” Id. at ¶ 8.

         Loston explains that he brought suit against the Sheriff's Office Defendants and Bowman “to redress the deprivation under color of law of Plaintiff's rights as secured by the United States and Louisiana Constitutions and the defamation, with resulting damages, including, but not limited to mental and psychological anguish.” Id. at ¶ 9.

         However, in paragraph 36 of the Complaint, Loston makes clear that he brought suit against Bowman for only the following:

A. In making false and defamatory statements;
B. In making false and defamatory statements and publishing same on social media that she knew or should have known would reach a wide variety of the public;
C. In causing embarrassment and injuries to Plaintiff in damaging his reputation; and
D. All other acts of negligence, etc. that will be shown at the trial of this matter.

[Doc. No. 1, ¶ 36].

         Allstate issued a standard homeowner's policy to Bowman, bearing policy number 921098588, with a coverage period of August 19, 2014, to August 19, 2015.

         Subsequent to the filing of Loston's Complaint, Bowman tendered the claims asserted to Allstate for defense and indemnity.

         On December 21, 2018, Judge John W. deGravelles granted summary judgment in favor of the Sheriff's Office Defendants and dismissed all claims against them. He further denied Bowman's Motion for Summary Judgment, finding that there was a genuine issue of material fact whether she committed the tort of defamation of Louisiana law. He took the instant motion under advisement.

         On April 2, 2019, the matter was reassigned to the undersigned. The instant motion is ripe for review.

         II.LAW AND ANALYSIS

         A. Standard of Review

         Summary judgment “shall [be] grant[ed] . . . if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” FED. R. CIV. P. 56(a). A fact is “‘material' if proof of its existence or nonexistence would affect the outcome of the lawsuit under applicable law in the case.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute about a material fact is ...


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.