DALEHITE v. PAVEMENT MARKINGS LLC (2026)

The trial court denied a declinatory exception of lis pendens filed by Kelly Dalehite. The court of appeal reversed, dismissing Pavement Markings, LLC's claims against Dalehite in the second-filed suit without prejudice. Finding the court of appeal erred, we grant the writ, reverse the court of appeal, and reinstate the judgment of the trial court.

Under La. Code Civ. P. art. 531, “[w]hen two or more suits are pending in a Louisiana court or courts on the same transaction or occurrence, between the same parties in the same capacities, the defendant may have all but the first suit dismissed by excepting thereto․” An exception of lis pendens should be sustained if a final judgment in the first suit would be res judicata in the subsequently filed suit. Saulsbury Industries Inc. v. Cabot Corp., 22-1162, p.2 (La. 11/1/22), 348 So. 3d 1267, 1268.

Here, the claims against Dalehite in the two suits do not arise from the same transaction or occurrence and would not be res judicata upon a final judgment. The reconventional demand in the first suit arises from Dalehite's employment relationship with Pavement Markings and his alleged breaches of duties owed to the company. The second suit arises from an alleged bid-rigging conspiracy among Dalehite and other defendants. Although the allegations in the two suits overlap, that factual overlap does not establish that the claims arise from “the same transaction or occurrence” for purposes of Article 531.

Accordingly, the exception of lis pendens was properly denied. We reverse the court of appeal and reinstate the judgment of the trial court.

REVERSED

PER CURIAM