DARRELL BERRY PRO SE AND CONSTANCE LAFAYETTE PRO SE v. WELLS FARGO BANK NA MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM MERS LSF10 MORTGAGE HOLDINGS LLC DEAN MORRIS CANDANCE COURTEAU SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC SLS BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE FOR LSF10 MASTER PARTICIPATION TRUST FAY SERVICING LLC CALIBER HOME LOANS INC DOES THROUGH 100 INCLUSIVE ET AL (2020)

In this appeal, the Plaintiffs appeal a judgment denying their motion to strike the defendants’ exceptions of vagueness, lis pendens, and improper cumulation of actions. After review, we dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction and decline to convert the appeal to an application for supervisory writs. We also deny several motions filed by the Plaintiffs after the appeal was lodged.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1

On December 27, 2005, Plaintiffs Darrell Berry and Constance Lafayette (Plaintiffs) borrowed $184,000 from LoanCity and, in return, executed a promissory note, agreeing to repay the amount borrowed. The promissory note was secured by a mortgage encumbering property located at 8338 Greenmoss Drive, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. On November 6, 2012, the mortgage was assigned to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo).

Before the instant suit was filed, the Plaintiffs defaulted on the promissory note and mortgage. Pursuant to the terms thereof, on or about April 10, 2017, Wells Fargo filed an executory process suit seeking a seizure and sale of the mortgaged property - that suit is captioned Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Darrell Kendrick Berry and Constance Lafayette Berry, Suit No. 656,99:1, Section 22 in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court (19th JDC) for the Parish of East Baton Rouge (the 2017 Executory Process Suit). The trial court, finding that Wells Fargo met the requirements for foreclosure, issued an order authorizing executory process and also issued a writ of seizure and sale of the mortgaged property. However, the sheriff's sale was continually delayed and cancelled by various lawsuits and bankruptcy proceedings filed by the Plaintiffs.

Nevertheless, alleging Wells Fargo did not follow the proper procedure in the 2017 Executory Process Suit, on October 7, 2022, the Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, filed the instant suit seeking injunctive relief and damages under Suit No. 724,405 in the 19th JDC (the 2022 Injunction Suit). In their petition, the Plaintiffs named several defendants, including the instant appellees, LSF10 Mortgage Holdings, LLC (LSF10), U.S. Bank Trust National Association as Trustee for LSF10 Master Participation Trust (U.S. Bank), and Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc. (MERS).²

Over approximately the next two years, the defendants in the 2022 Injunction Suit, individually or in varying groups, filed or adopted numerous exceptions, objecting to the Plaintiffs’ claims based on vagueness, lis pendens, improper cumulation, failure to state a cause of action, prescription, peremption, and res judicata. Pertinent herein, on November 10, 2022, defendants Fay Servicing, LLC and Caliber Home Loans, LLC (Fay/Caliber) filed exceptions of vagueness, lis pendens, and improper cumulation. On March 8, 2024, LSF10 and U.S. Bank (LSF10/U.S. Bank), appellees in the instant suit, filed similar exceptions of vagueness, lis pendens, and improper cumulation. The Plaintiffs responded by filing motions to strike ³ Fay/Caliber's exceptions and LSF10/U.S. Bank's exceptions.

On May 13, 2024, the trial court held a hearing on several exceptions, including those filed by Fay/Caliber and LSF10/U.S. Bank, and also addressed the Plaintiffs’ motions to strike those exceptions. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court orally denied the Plaintiffs’ motions to strike. On July 1, 2024, the trial court signed one judgment memorializing its denial of the Plaintiffs’ motion to strike Fay/Caliber's exceptions of vagueness, lis pendens, and improper cumulation (the Fay/ Caliber judgment). On the same date, July 1, 2024, the trial court signed another judgment memorializing its denial of the Plaintiffs’ motion to strike LSF10/U.S. Bank's exceptions of vagueness, lis pendens, and improper cumulation (the LSF10/U.S. Bank judgment).⁴

The Plaintiffs appealed the adverse judgments. This Court lodged the appeal of the Fay/Caliber judgment under docket number 2025 CA 0068. In Berry v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, 2025-0068 (La. App. 1 Cir. 12/23/25), 427 So.3d 402, 406-07, writ denied, 2026-00198 (La. 4/21/26, 429 So.3d 736 (Berry 0068), the Court dismissed that appeal, finding the Fay/Caliber judgment was interlocutory and non-appealable and declined to review the judgment under its supervisory jurisdiction.

This Court lodged the appeal of the LSF10/U.S. Bank judgment under docket number 2026 CA 0495, the instant appeal. In conjunction with this appeal, the Plaintiffs filed the following motions in this Court: a Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Appellate Jurisdiction; a Motion to Stay Appellate Proceedings Pending Supervisory Review; Motion to Strike Briefing Schedule for Lack of Jurisdiction; a Request for Stay of Proceedings (pending Supreme Court writ ruling); and a Motion for Judicial Notice of Absence of Lodged Appellate Record. Also, this Court issued a rule to show cause, noting the LSF10/U.S. Bank judgment appeared to be an interlocutory, non-appealable ruling, and ordering the parties to show cause as to whether the appeal should be dismissed. The Plaintiffs’ motions and the rule to show cause were referred to this panel to decide along with the merits of the appeal.

DISCUSSION

This Court's appellate jurisdiction extends to final judgments and to interlocutory judgments when expressly allowed by law. See La. C.C.P. arts. 1841, 2083(A) and (C). We have reviewed the LSF10/U.S. Bank judgment. We conclude the reasoning applied by the Berry 0688 Court equally applies herein. That is, the LSF10/U.S. Bank judgment is interlocutory and non-appealable. Further, after reviewing the factors set forth in Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., 396 So.2d 878 (La. 1981) (per curiam), we decline to review the LSF10/U.S. Bank judgment under our supervisory jurisdiction at this time. The Plaintiffs’ claims against LSF10 and U.S. Bank have been dismissed with prejudice by a separately signed July 1, 2024 judgment, which granted those defendants’ exceptions of no cause of action and prescription. The Plaintiffs appealed that judgment under this Court's docket number 2026 CA 0496 and that appeal remains pending before this Court. Accord Berry 0688, 427 So.3d at 406-07, dismissing a similar appeal.

As to the Plaintiffs’ above referenced pending motions, we also conclude the reasoning applied by the Berry 0688 Court applies. That is, based on this Court's lack of appellate jurisdiction, as well as our decision not to convert the appeal to an application for supervisory writs, we deny all of the motions as moot. Accord Berry 0688, 427 So.3d at 406, n.3.

CONCLUSION

For the above reasons, we grant the rule to show cause and dismiss the instant appeal. We deny the pending motions filed by Darrell Berry and Constance Lafayette. We assess costs of the appeal to Darrell Berry and Constance Lafayette.

RULE TO SHOW CAUSE GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL FOR LACK OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION DENIED; MOTION TO STAY APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS PENDING SUPERVISORY REVIEW DENIED; MOTION TO STRIKE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION DENIED; REQUEST FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS DENIED; AND MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF ABSENCE OF LODGED APPELLATE RECORD DENIED.

Office Of The Clerk

Court of Appeal, First Circuit

State of Louisiana

www.la-fcca.ore

Rodd Naquin Clerk of Court

Post Office Box 4408

Baton Rouge, LA

70821-4408

(225) 382-3000

Notice of Judgment and Disposition

November 06, 2026

Docket Number: 2026 - CA - 0495

Darrell Berry, Pro Se, and Constance Lafayette, Pro Se

versus

Wells Fargo Bank, NA, Mortgage, Electronic Registration System, (MERS); LSF10 Mortgage Holdings, LLC, Dean Morris, L.L.C., Candance A Courteau, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (SLS), U.S. Bank Trust National Association as Trustee for LSF10 Master Participation Trust, Fay Servicing, LLC, Caliber Home Loans, Inc., Does 1 Through 100 Inclusive, et al

TO: Christopher D. Meyer

190 E. Capitol Street, Ste. M-

Jackson, MS 39201

cmeyer@burr.com

John C Morris

1505 North 19th Street

Monroe, LA 71207

jmorris@creditorlawyers.com

Lindsay Meador Young

3861 Ambassador Caffery Pa

Lafayette, LA 70503

Imeador@gallowaylawfirm.co

Tyler James Minick

701 Poydras Street

40th Floor

New Orleans, LA 70139

Darrell Berry

8338 Greenmoss Drive

Baton Rouge, La 70806

Eric James Simonson

Hinshaw & Culbertson

400 Poydras Street

Suite 3150

New Orleans, LA 70130

esimonson@hinshawlaw.com

Laura C. Cannon

400 Poydras Street

Suite 3150

New Orleans, LA 70130

lcannon@hinshawlaw.com

Peyton C. Lambert

601 Poydras St, Ste. 2660

New Orleans, LA

70130-6036

Constance Lafayette

8338 Greenmoss Drive

Baton Rouge, La 70806

Hon. Beau Higginbotham

300 North Boulevard

6th Floor

Baton Rouge, LA 70802

In accordance with Local Rule 6 of the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, I hereby certify that this notice of judgment and disposition and the attached disposition were transmitted this date to the trial judge or equivalent, all counsel of record, and all parties not represented by counsel.

RODD NAQUIN CLERK OF COURT

FOOTNOTES

2.   MERS is named as an appellee in this case and is named as one of the parties in whose favor the July 1, 2024 judgment appealed herein was rendered. However, the appellate record contains no exception of vagueness, lis pendens, and improper cumulation filed by MERS.

3.   Although the Plaintiffs captioned each of their underlying pleadings as a “demand to strike,” we reference the pleadings as motions to strike, as done in Berry v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, 2025-0068 (La. App. 1 Cir. 12/23/25), 427 So.3d 402, 405, n.l, writ denied, 2026-00198 (La. 4/21/26), 429 So.3d 736.

4.   At the May 13, 2024 hearing, the trial court also heard exceptions of res judicata, no cause of action, prescription, and peremption filed by defendant, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (SLS). On July 1, 2024, the trial court signed a judgment granting SLS's exception of res judicata and dismissing all claims against SLS with prejudice. The Plaintiffs appealed that judgment under this Court's docket number 2026 CA 0494 and that appeal remains pending before this Court.

GREENE, J.