Opinion
NO. 2019-CA-0990
03-25-2020
ANN STREIFFER, WIFE OF/AND RICHARD STREIFFER v. DELTATECH CONSTRUCTION, LLC AND SANDRA TOMASETTI
BELSOME, J., CONCURS IN PART AND DISSENTS IN PART
I respectfully concur in part and dissent in part. In particular, I concur in the majority opinion insofar as it affirms the trial court's judgment denying Deltatech's motion to quash the judgment debtor as well as its contempt judgment against Deltatech. However, given that Deltatech's appeal was frivolous, I would grant attorney's fees and costs as requested in the Strieffers' answer.
If this is not a frivolous appeal, then frivolous appeals do not exist. Here, the matter was litigated and a final judgment was rendered. Streiffer v. Deltatech Constr., LLC, No. 18-CA-0155, 2018 WL 4923559 (La. App. 4 Cir. 10/10/18), writ denied, 18-2107 (La. 2/18/19), 263 So.3d 1154. Now, in light of a final judgment, the meritless motion to quash and blatant refusal to appear before the trial court are further exemplifies the history of delays to avoid satisfaction of a final judgment. See Dowl v. Redi Care Home Health Ass'n, 09-1300, p. 16 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2/3/10), 31 So.3d 596, 608, writ denied, 10-0700 (La. 5/28/10), 36 So.3d 252 (an appeal will be deemed frivolous if it does not present a substantial legal question or if it is obvious either that it was taken solely for delay or that appealing counsel does not sincerely believe in the view of law that he advocates). Since this appeal does not present a substantial legal question and seeks only to delay, I find Deltatech's appeal was frivolous and would award $15,000.00 in attorney's fees and costs. For this reason, I respectfully dissent from the majority. I concur in the majority opinion in all other respects.