VII PEAKS CO OPTIVIST INCOME BDC II INC v. ANSGAR MEDIA (2025)

Defendants, Ansgar Media, L.L.C., PINI USA L.L.C., Plantation Village Studios, L.L.C., and Jake Seal, appeal a March 19, 2024 partial summary judgment rendered against them and in favor of VII Peaks Co-Optivist Income BDC II, Inc. After review, we vacate the judgment and remand.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In 2015-2016, VII Peaks Co-Optivist Income BDC II, Inc. (VII Peaks) entered into four loan agreements with Ansgar Media, L.L.C. (Ansgar), whereby VII Peaks loaned Ansgar several million dollars to finance multiple film projects. In March 2020, VII Peaks filed this suit against Ansgar, in the 20th Judicial District Court, alleging Ansgar had breached two of the loan agreements and seeking an order sequestering the collateral used to secure the loans. In October 2022, VII Peaks filed an amended petition alleging Ansgar had breached all four of the loan agreements, was liable for damages, among other relief, and naming multiple additional defendants, including PINI USA L.L.C. (PINI), Plantation Village Studios, L.L.C. (PVS), and Jake Seal, the manager and sole member of both PINI and PVS.¹

In a June 19, 2023 Order, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the trial court, Judge Sydney Picou Walker, ruled that Ansgar was liable to VII Peaks for $13,429,487.82, representing $5,859,000 due on the loan principal and $7,570,487.82 due in interest (calculated as of the date of the June 19, 2023 Order).

On December 12, 2023, VII Peaks filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Regarding Alter Ego and Single Business Enterprise as to defendants Ansgar, PINI, PVS, and Mr. Seal (Ansgar Defendants). The Ansgar Defendants opposed the motion. On March 11, 2024, Judge Walker held a hearing on the motion. At the end of the hearing, Judge Walker indicated her intent to grant the motion, and VII Peak's counsel stated that he would prepare the judgment for her signature.

On March 19, 2024, Judge Kathryn E. Jones, another trial court judge who sits in the 20th Judicial District Court, signed the judgment memorializing Judge Walker's oral ruling. The March 19, 2024 partial summary judgment granted VII Peaks’ motion and ordered that the Ansgar Defendants were each cast in judgment for $13,429,487.82, the same amount for which Ansgar itself had been held liable in Judge Walker's June 19, 2023 Order. On the signature line of the March 19, 2024 judgment, Judge Jones signed “Kathryn E. Jones for Div. B.” We take judicial notice of the Louisiana Secretary of State's “Elected Officials” database, which indicates that Judge Jones presides over Division A of the 20th Judicial District Court, and Judge Walker presides over Division B of the 20th Judicial District Court. See La. C.E. art. 201; Labranche v. Landry, 2022-0461 (La. App. 1 Cir. 12/15/22), 357 So.3d 395, 399, n.3 (stating that courts may take judicial notice of governmental websites); State ex rel. J.R.B., 2008-1428 (La. App. 3 Cir. 3/4/09), 11 So.3d 2, 3 (taking judicial notice of Louisiana Secretary of State's “Elected Officials Database”).

DISCUSSION

Appellate courts have a duty to examine subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte, even when the parties do not raise the issue. Flowers v. Tasker, 2024-0690 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2/28/25), ___ So.3d, ___, 2025 WL 655596, *7. Generally, the judge who presides over a case must sign the judgment, and a judgment signed by a judge who did not preside over the hearing does not constitute a final judgment subject to this Court's appellate jurisdiction. See La. C.C.P. art. 1911; In re: M.L.M., 2019-1030 (La. App. 1 Cir. 4/23/20), 300 So.3d 902, 905-06.² Although there are exceptions allowing a judge who did not hear a matter to sign a judgment, none apply here. Under La. C.C.P. art. 253.3, a duty judge is permitted to hear and sign specific orders and judgments; however, the judgment at issue, which reflects the substantive ruling of another judge, is not one of those specified.³ Nor was this a case where a successor judge has authority to sign a judgment, as Judge Jones was not a successor judge to Judge Walker as that term is used in La. R.S. 13:4209(B).⁴

Herein, as stated, the record shows that Judge Walker presided over the March 11, 2024 hearing and orally ruled on VII Peaks’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Regarding Alter Ego and Single Business Enterprise. However, Judge Jones, rather than Judge Walker, signed the March 19, 2024 written judgment. A judgment signed by a judge who did not preside over the hearing is not an informality, irregularity, or misstatement that may be corrected by the trial court under La. C.C.P. art. 2088(4), but is instead a fatal defect. In re: M.L.M., 300 So.3d at 906. Accordingly, we conclude that this Court does not have appellate jurisdiction to review the March 19, 2024 partial summary judgment.

CONCLUSION

For the above reasons, we vacate the March 19, 2024 judgment and remand this case for further proceedings. We assess costs of the appeal one-half to Ansgar Media, LLC., PINI USA, L.L.C., Plantation Village Studios, L.L.C., and Jake Seal and one-half to VII Peaks Co-Optivist Income BDC II, Inc.

JUDGMENT VACATED; REMANDED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   In its amended petition, VII Peaks also named Black Hangar Studios, L.L.C., ORWO Films, L.L.C., ORWO Properties, L.L.C., ORWO Studios, L.L.C., ORWO Production Studios, L.L.C., ORWO Film Distribution, L.L.C., Shannon Chandler, and Jodie Seal as defendants. These defendants are not parties to this appeal.

2.   Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 1911 requires that every final judgment contain the typewritten or printed name of the judge and be signed by the judge. This has been interpreted to mean that the judge before whom the case was tried must sign the judgment. In re: M.L.M., 300 So.3d at 905.

3.   Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 253.3 pertinently provides:A. In any case assigned pursuant to Article 253.1, a duty judge shall only hear and sign orders or judgments for the following:(1) Domestic relations emergency matters and protective orders concerning physical safety.(2) Temporary restraining orders.(3) Default judgments, stipulated matters, examination of judgment debtors, orders to proceed in forma pauperis, orders allowing the filing of supplemental and amending petitions when no trial date has been assigned, orders allowing incidental demands when no trial date has been assigned, orders allowing additional time to answer, and judicial commitments.(4) Uncontested cases in which all parties other than the plaintiff are represented by an attorney appointed by the court.(5) Uncontested judgments of divorce pursuant to Civil Code Article 102.(6) Orders directing the taking of an inventory; judgments decreeing or homologating a partition, when unopposed; judgments probating a testament ex parte; orders directing the execution of a testament; orders confirming or appointing a legal representative, when unopposed; orders appointing an undertutor or an undercurator; orders appointing an attorney at law to represent an absent, incompetent, or unrepresented person, or an attorney for an absent heir; orders authorizing the sale of property of an estate administered by a legal representative; orders directing the publication of the notice of the filing of a tableau of distribution, or of an account, by a legal representative; judgments recognizing heirs or legatees and sending them into possession, when unopposed; and all orders for the administration and settlement of a succession, or for the administration of an estate by a legal representative.(7) Orders for the seizure and sale of property in an executory proceeding.* * * *C. In any case assigned pursuant to Article 253.1, a duty judge may sign any order specifically and expressly authorized by the judge to whom the case is assigned.

4.   Louisiana Revised Statutes 13:4209 pertinently provides:B. (1) In cases which are heard and in which judgment is rendered, but not signed, whether the case was taken under advisement or not, if the judge who rendered the judgment dies, resigns, or is removed from office, or if his term expires before signing judgment in the case, his successor in office shall have the authority to sign a judgment which conforms with the judgment rendered.(2) If a prior judge has stated an affirmative intent to sign a judgment and failed to do so for whatever reason, the successor judge is empowered to sign the judgment.

GREENE, J.