Opinion
2023 CA 0316 2023 CW 0105
12-27-2023
THE RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION FOR THE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE v. SID J. GAUTREAUX, III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH
Murphy J. Foster, III David R. Cassidy Jude C. Bursavich Nicole Gould Frey Jacob E. Roussel Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee/ Respondent Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East Baton Rouge Mary G. Erlingson Catherine S. St. Pierre London B. Smith Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Defendant/ Relator Sid J. Gautreaux, III, in his Official Capacity as Sheriff of East Baton Rouge Parish Robert E. Tarcza Sherri M. Morris New Orleans, Louisiana and Laura Gail Sullivan Baton Rouge, Louisiana and Robert D. Klausner (Pro Hoc Vice) Plantation, Florida Counsel for Third -Party Appellants Assessors' Retirement Fund, Clerks of Court Retirement and Relief Fund, District Attorneys' Retirement System, Municipal Employees Retirement System of Louisiana, Registrars of Voters Employees' Retirement System, and Sheriffs Pension and Relief Fund Larry M. Roedel Bradley C. Guin Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Third -Parry Appellant Municipal Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana
On Appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Docket No. 725439 Honorable Ronald R. Johnson, Judge Presiding
Murphy J. Foster, III
David R. Cassidy
Jude C. Bursavich
Nicole Gould Frey
Jacob E. Roussel
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee/ Respondent
Recreation and Park Commission for
the Parish of East Baton Rouge
Mary G. Erlingson
Catherine S. St. Pierre
London B. Smith
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Counsel for Defendant/ Relator
Sid J. Gautreaux, III, in his Official
Capacity as Sheriff of East Baton
Rouge Parish
Robert E. Tarcza
Sherri M. Morris
New Orleans, Louisiana and
Laura Gail Sullivan
Baton Rouge, Louisiana and
Robert D. Klausner
(Pro Hoc Vice)
Plantation, Florida
Counsel for Third -Party Appellants
Assessors' Retirement Fund, Clerks of
Court Retirement and Relief Fund,
District Attorneys' Retirement System,
Municipal Employees Retirement System
of Louisiana, Registrars of Voters
Employees' Retirement System, and
Sheriffs Pension and Relief Fund
Larry M. Roedel
Bradley C. Guin
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Counsel for Third -Parry Appellant
Municipal Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana
BEFORE: McCLENDON, HESTER, AND MILLER, JJ.
McClendon, J.
In this ad valorem tax case, certain state and statewide public retirement systems who have not been named as parties, but who claim to be needed for just adjudication, have appealed the trial court's judgment, granting a preliminary injunction in favor of the plaintiff, the Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East Baton Rouge (BREC), and enjoining Sid J. Gautreaux, III, in his capacity as Sheriff of East Baton Rouge Parish and as ex officio collector of East Baton Rouge Parish ad valorem taxes (the Sheriff), from remitting any ad valorem tax levied by BREC to any of the retirement systems. In a related request for supervisory review, the Sheriff also challenges the trial court's judgment, denying his peremptory exceptions raising the objection of nonjoinder of parties and granting the preliminary injunction. For the reasons that follow, we grant the writ application of the Sheriff and vacate the judgment of the trial court. Further, we dismiss the appeal filed by the retirement systems and remand this matter for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
The Sheriff's writ application was referred to this panel for review in conjunction with this related appeal. See The Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East Baton Rouge v. Sid J. Gautreaux, III, in his capacity as Sheriff of East Baton Rouge Parish, 2023 CW 0105 (La.App. 1 Cir. 4/19/23).
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On November 7, 2022, BREC filed a Verified Petition for Injunctive and Declaratory Judgment Relief against the Sheriff. Therein, BREC asserted that it is a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana domiciled in East Baton Rouge Parish and that it is a public corporation engaged in public recreation and public park purposes. BREC alleged that pursuant to LSA-Const. art. VI, § 32 and LSA-R.S. 33:4570.4(6), the voters of East Baton Rouge Parish on several occasions were asked to authorize the levy of ad valorem taxes to fund BREC's operations and that on each occasion, the voters authorized the levying of the taxes (the BREC taxes). BREC further averred that the propositions presented to and approved by the voters limited BREC's use of the taxes to the acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of recreational facilities and its operating budget.
BREC was created pursuant to LSA-R.S. 33:4570, et seq. Louisiana Revised Statutes 33:4570.4(B) provides, in part:
[I]n accordance with the provisions of Article VI, Section 32 of the Constitution of Louisiana and any other applicable provisions of the constitution and laws of the state, [BREC] may impose and collect from year to year taxes upon all of the taxable property carried on the assessment [rolls] of the parish of East Baton Rouge ... and the proceeds of any such tax shall be used in acquiring, developing, maintaining, and operating the public parks and recreational properties and facilities of the commission and in making available funds for the operating budget.Article VI, § 32 of the Louisiana Constitution provides that "[f]or the purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, maintaining, or operating any work of public improvement, a political subdivision may levy special taxes when authorized by a majority of the electors in the political subdivision who vote thereon in an election held for that purpose."
BREC asserted that the Sheriff collects over forty ad valorem taxes levied in East Baton Rouge Parish by various governmental agencies and that some, but not all, of these taxes are subject to LSA-R.S. 11:82, which requires the Sheriff to remit a percentage of the taxes collected to certain state and statewide public retirement systems. BREC contended that the Sheriff, however, treats all of the taxes collected as taxes under LSA-R.S. 11:82, that the Sheriff remits a portion of all taxes collected to the state and statewide public retirement systems, and that in 2021, the Sheriff remitted approximately two million dollars of the BREC taxes to the state and statewide public retirement systems.
BREC averred that the BREC taxes are not LSA-R.S. 11:82 taxes since the purposes to which the BREC taxes are dedicated do not include funding the state and statewide public retirement systems. Thus, according to BREC, the Sheriff's application of LSA-R.S. 11:82 to the BREC taxes violates LSA-Const. art. VI, § 32 and makes LSA-R.S. 11:82 unconstitutional as applied. Therefore, BREC requested a declaratory judgment that LSA-R.S. 11:82 is not applicable to the BREC taxes or, alternatively, if LSA-R.S. 11:82 is applicable to the BREC taxes, a declaratory judgment that LSA-R.S. 11:82 is unconstitutional as applied to the BREC taxes. BREC filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction concurrently with its petition, seeking to enjoin the Sheriff from diverting any of the BREC taxes to the state and statewide public retirement systems.
In response, the Sheriff filed a dilatory exception objecting to the use of summary proceedings and two peremptory exceptions raising the objection of "nonjoinder of indispensable parties," one directed to seven state and statewide public retirement systems and the other to the City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge (the City/Parish). See LSA-C.C.P. arts. 926(A)(3) and 927(A)(4). The Sheriff also filed an opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction. BREC opposed the exceptions.
Although the Sheriff's peremptory exceptions referred to "indispensable" parties, we note, and as discussed herein, LSA-C.C.P. art. 641 no longer refers to "necessary" and "indispensable" parties and instead considers those parties needed for just adjudication.
The state and statewide public retirement systems identified by the Sheriff as "indispensable" parties are the Assessors' Retirement Fund, Clerks' of Court Retirement and Relief Fund, District Attorneys' Retirement System, Municipal Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana, Registrars' of Voters Employees' Retirement System, Sheriffs' Pension and Relief Fund, and Teachers' Retirement System of Louisiana.
The trial court set the matters for hearing on December 16, 2022. After denying a motion to vacate the hearing date, the trial court heard and denied the dilatory exception raising the objection of improper use of summary proceedings. The trial court then heard the peremptory exceptions objecting to the nonjoinder of parties. After argument, the trial court denied the two peremptory exceptions. The trial court next heard the merits of the motion for a preliminary injunction, at which time, evidence and witness testimony was introduced. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court granted the motion for the preliminary injunction, adopting BREC's memoranda in support of the motion as its reasons for judgment.
We note that two of the state and statewide public retirement systems, the District Attorneys' Retirement System and the Sheriffs' Pension and Relief Fund, filed a "Motion and Incorporated Memorandum to Vacate Hearing Date," arguing that BREC was seeking to change the status quo, which required a full evidentiary hearing. Counsel for the two retirement systems also argued that other retirement systems were likely to join the District Attorneys' Retirement System and the Sheriffs' Pension and Relief Fund, but he had not yet had the opportunity to obtain retainer agreements and, further, had not had the opportunity to propound discovery, conduct depositions, conduct research, and identify any other parties needed for just adjudication. The trial court denied the motion in open court on December 16, 2022, stating that the entities seeking to vacate the hearing date "still have a right to intervene in this suit and assert their interest at various times. The court does not believe that any rulings today would adversely affect that interest to the extent that we will have... a permanent injunction hearing as well as a declaratory [judgment] hearing."
On January 10, 2023, the trial court signed a judgment in conformity with its rulings, which denied the Sheriff's exceptions and granted the preliminary injunction, at the Sheriff's costs. The judgment provides, in pertinent part:
IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Exceptions of Nonjoinder of Indispensable Parties are hereby DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Exception of Improper Use of Summary Proceedings is hereby DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Motion for Preliminary Injunction is hereby GRANTED. Defendant, Sid J. Gautreaux, III, in his capacity as Sheriff of East Baton Rouge Parish and as ex officio collector of East Baton Rouge Parish ad valorem taxes, is restrained, enjoined, and prohibited from remitting any ad valorem tax levied by the Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East Baton Rouge to any retirement systems pursuant to [LSA-]R.S. 11:82 and that those remittances which would have been transferred to the retirement systems pursuant to [LSA-]R.S. 11:82 in the amounts set forth in the
following two reports: 1.) Office of Louisiana Legislative Auditor 2022 East Baton Rouge Parish Pension Report and 2.) Office of Louisiana Auditor 2022 East Baton Rouge Parish Pension Report Excluding Assessors' Retirement Fund, and any Office of Louisiana Legislative Auditor Pension Report for any subsequent year, as long as the preliminary injunction is in effect are instead to be deposited into the Registry of the Court.
The Sheriff did not appeal the judgment granting the preliminary injunction. Rather, the Sheriff filed a writ application with this court, asserting that the trial court erred in denying his exceptions. The Assessors' Retirement Fund, Clerks' of Court Retirement and Relief Fund, District Attorneys' Retirement System, Municipal Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana, Registrars' of Voters Employees' Retirement System, and Sheriffs' Pension and Relief Fund (the Retirement Systems) filed a brief of amici curiae\n support of the Sheriff's application for supervisory writs, and BREC filed an opposition to the writ application.
The Retirement Systems also filed an appeal, asserting their right to appeal pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 2086, which provides that "[a] person who could have intervened in the trial court may appeal, whether or not any other appeal has been taken." In their appeal, the Retirement Systems assigned the following as error:
1) The trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over an action that impaired the due process and property rights of the Retirement Systems when the Retirement Systems were not parties to the proceeding;
2) The trial court erred in granting a preliminary injunction in the absence of a showing of irreparable injury;
3) The trial court erred in determining a constitutional question in a summary proceeding;
4) The trial court erred when it found that BREC's entire ad valorem tax levies were "dedicated taxes" as provided in LSA-Const. art. VI, § 26; and
5) The trial court erred when it determined that BREC's ad valorem taxes were not subject to the provisions of LSA-R.S. 11:82.
LAW AND DISCUSSION
As background, we point out that in the late 1980's, the state experienced a cash flow crisis. City of New Orleans v. Louisiana Assessors' Retirement and Relief Fund, 2005-2548 (La. 10/1/07), 986 So.2d 1, 9. In order to ensure the financial soundness of both state and statewide public retirement systems affected by the crisis, the legislature proposed amending the state constitution. Pursuant to 1987 Acts. No. 947, § 2, the proposal to add paragraph E to LSA-Const. art. X, § 29 was submitted to the voters and ratified on November 21, 1987. Id.
The amendment became effective on December 24, 1987. As enacted, LSA-Const. art. X, § 29(E) requires that state and statewide retirement systems attain and maintain actuarial soundness and that the legislature establish the particular method of actuarial valuation to be employed for purposes of accomplishing this end. LSA-Const. art. X, § 29(E)(1). With respect to statewide public retirement systems whose benefits are not guaranteed by the state, subsection (E)(3) requires that the legislature determine all contributions by members, employers, and dedicated taxes required for sound actuarial maintenance of the retirement systems. LSA-Const. art. X, § 29(E)(3); City of New Orleans, 986 So.2d at 9.
In the year following the adoption of LSA-Const. art, X, § 29(E), the legislature enacted Title 11, the Louisiana Public Retirement Law. City of New Orleans, 986 So.2d at 9. In Title 11, the legislature consolidated the law regarding public retirement systems so as to comply with the constitutional mandate that public retirement systems be maintained on a sound actuarial basis. Id.
The statute at issue in this matter, LSA-R.S. 11:82, funds state and statewide public retirement systems via the collection and remission of aggregate ad valorem taxes. Subsection A lists the eight specific funds subject to the statute along with the percentage of "aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish" relative to each fund.
With respect to tax contributions, LSA-R.S. 11:81 provides that "[t]he purpose of this Subpart is to comply with the requirements of Article X, Section 29(E)(3) of the Constitution of Louisiana that the legislature shall determine dedicated taxes for statewide public retirement systems not covered by the provisions of Article X, Section 29(A) or (B) of the Constitution of Louisiana."
Louisiana Revised Statutes 11:82 provides:
A. Ad valorem tax contributions to state and statewide public retirement systems shall be as follows:
(1) Assessors' Retirement Fund. Dedicated funds are .25% (1% for Orleans Parish) of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish.
(2) Clerks' of Court Retirement and Relief Fund. Dedicated funds are .25% (.5% for Orleans Parish) of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the rolls of each parish.
(3) Municipal Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana. Dedicated funds are .25% of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish except Orleans; funds collected from the parish of East Baton Rouge are to be distributed pursuant to R.S. 11:1862. These amounts are split between Plan A and Plan B based on active member payroll.
(4) Parochial Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana. Dedicated funds are .25% of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish except Orleans and East Baton Rouge. These amounts are split between Plan A and Plan B based on active member payroll.
(5) Sheriffs' Pension and Relief Fund. Dedicated funds are .5% of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish.
(6) District Attorneys' Retirement System. Dedicated funds are .2% of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish.
(7) Registrars' of Voters Employees' Retirement System. Dedicated funds are .0625% of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish.
(8)(a) Teachers' Retirement System of Louisiana. Dedicated funds are one percent of aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls of each parish except Orleans.
(b) Effective with the 2004 tax roll payment, the Teachers' Retirement System of Louisiana shall credit each city, parish, or other local public school system located completely within East Baton Rouge Parish with an amount equal to one percent of the aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls for any millage levied by that school system plus an amount equal to the percentage of the total aggregate taxes collected by that school system of all aggregate taxes collected by all school systems within the parish of one percent of the aggregate taxes shown to be collectible by the tax rolls for any millage levied by an entity other than a school board remitted to the system from East Baton Rouge Parish.
(c) Within thirty days after the effective date of Subparagraph (b) of this Paragraph, the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board, the Baker City School Board, and the Zachary Community School Board shall file with the Teachers' Retirement System of Louisiana and the assessor for East Baton Rouge Parish a formula to be used to calculate the amount to be credited to each school board.
B. Provided, however, in the event the employer contributions become zero and employee contributions and dedicated taxes prescribed in this Section provide more than the total actuarially required contribution to any system, then the Public Retirement Systems' Actuarial Committee shall determine the amount of the aggregate taxes shown on the tax rolls of each parish that shall be remitted to such retirement system.
In this matter, BREC brought a declaratory relief action, together with an action for injunctive relief, to declare LSA-R.S. 11:82 invalid as applied to BREC. BREC is requesting that the Sheriff discontinue remitting taxes levied by BREC to the Retirement Systems, which taxes have been remitted to the Retirement Systems in accordance with LSA-R.S. 11:82 since the statute's enactment in 1989.
In its writ application, the Sheriff argues that the trial court erred in failing to sustain its peremptory exceptions objecting to the nonjoinder of the Retirement Systems and the City/Parish as parties pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 641. The Sheriff asserts that his sole role as the ex officio tax collector is to collect ad valorem taxes and distribute those taxes to taxing entities and the Retirement Systems in accordance with the law. The Sheriff avers that since the Retirement Systems are the recipients of a portion of the ad valorem taxes collected pursuant to LSA-R.S. 11:82, the Retirement Systems have a pecuniary interest in the funds at issue and are parties needed for just adjudication in these proceedings. However, BREC contends that the Retirement Systems were not being asked to do anything and that it was unnecessary for the Retirement Systems to be a party in order to determine if the BREC taxes in the possession of the Sheriff should go to BREC.
The Sheriff also maintains that the City/Parish, which receives undedicated ad valorem taxes, must also be joined. The Sheriff avers that the City/Parish levies undedicated taxes for its general tax fund, and if BREC is successful, the BREC taxes that were being remitted to the Retirement Systems pursuant to LSA-R.S. 11:82 may have to be paid out of the City/Parish's general tax fund, citing City of New Orleans, 986 So.2d at 19 n.9. Therefore, according to the Sheriff, without naming the City/Parish, the City/Parish's ability to protect its interests have been impaired.
Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 641 governs the joinder of parties needed for just adjudication and provides:
A person shall be joined as a party in the action when either:
(1) In his absence complete relief cannot be accorded among those already parties.
(2) He claims an interest relating to the subject matter of the action and is so situated that the adjudication of the action in his absence may either:
(a) As a practical matter, impair or impede his ability to protect that interest.
(b) Leave any of the persons already parties subject to a substantial risk of incurring multiple or inconsistent obligations.
Thus, Article 641 establishes two sets of circumstance under which a third-party may be considered a party needed for just adjudication. First, under Article 641(1), a person may be considered a party needed for just adjudication if, absent his presence, "complete relief cannot be accorded among those already parties." Second, under Article 641(2), a person may be considered a party needed for just adjudication if that person claims an interest relating to the subject matter of the suit and his absence would either impair or impede his ability to protect that interest or would leave already-existing parties subject to a substantial risk of multiple or inconsistent obligations. See Industrial Companies, Inc. v. Durbin, 2002-0665 (La. 1/28/03), 837 So.2d 1207, 1217.
Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure articles 641 through 646 were amended by 1995 La. Acts, No. 662, § 1. Prior to the statutes' amendments, courts would distinguish between "necessary" and "indispensable" parties. Indispensable parties to an action were those whose interests in the subject matter were so interrelated, and would be so directly affected by judgment, that a complete and equitable adjudication of the controversy could not be made unless they were joined in the action. No adjudication of an action could be made unless all indispensable parties were joined therein. Grezaffi v. Carroll, 20220229 (La.App. 1 Cir. 4/6/23), 2023 WL 2806604, *4 (unpublished). The 1995 amendments eliminated the categories of "indispensable parties" and "necessary parties" in favor of a single category of "parties needed for just adjudication." Industrial Companies, Inc., 837 So.2d at 1217 n.6.
However, the amendments to the joinder articles did not change the principle that an action cannot be adjudicated unless all persons who are required by LSA-C.C.P. art. 641 to be joined as parties are joined in the litigation. Stephenson v. Nations Credit Financial Services Corp., 98-1688 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/24/99), 754 So.2d 1011,1018-19. Article 641 continues to mandate the joinder of persons needed for just adjudication of an action. Stephenson , 754 So.2d at 1019.
It is axiomatic that courts are without power to adjudicate the rights of a person who is not a party to the litigation or appropriately represented. Terrebonne Parish School Bd. v. Bass Enterprises Production Co., 2002-2119 (La.App. 1 Cir. 8/8/03), 852 So.2d 541, 545-46, writs denied, 2003-2786, 2003-2873 (La. 1/9/04), 862 So.2d 984, 985. When an appellate court notices the absence of parties to a suit needed for just adjudication on appeal, the appropriate remedy is to set aside the judgment and remand the matter for joinder of the absent parties and retrial. See Terrebonne Parish School Bd., 852 So.2d at 546. An adjudication made without making a person described in Article 641 a party to the litigation is an absolute nullity. Stephenson , 754 So.2d at 1019.
Pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 645 the "failure to join a party to an action may be pleaded in the peremptory exception, or may be noticed by the trial or appellate court on its own motion." See also LSA-C.C.P. art. 927(B) (a trial or appellate court may notice an exception of nonjoinder of a party under LSA-C.C.P. arts. 641 and 642 on its own motion).
Further, because Article 641 provides that persons described in the article shall be joined, the burden is placed on those already parties to the litigation to bring in all Article 641 persons, not upon the nonparties to intervene in actions to which they are required to be joined pursuant to Article 641. Stephenson , 754 So.2d at 1021. Appellate courts review a trial court's ruling on a peremptory exception raising the objection of nonjoinder of a party needed for just adjudication under an abuse of discretion standard. Succession of Horrell, 2021-0168 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/17/21), 331 So.3d 1072, 1078.
The language in Article 641 is mandatory, i.e., persons described in the article shall be joined, whereas the language of LSA-C.C.P. arts. 1091 (intervention) and 2086 (appeal of nonparty) are permissive, i.e., a third person may intervene or appeal. Grezaffi , 2023 WL 2806604 at *5.
The very nature of the relief requested by BREC puts at issue the determination of the right to the BREC taxes. This determination is inextricably linked to the statutory and constitutional rights and interests of the Retirement Systems, which are directly affected by this litigation. Unquestionably, a complete and just adjudication of this matter cannot be made unless the Retirement Systems are joined as parties, and their absence will, as a practical matter, impair or impede their ability to protect their interests. Therefore, we find that the Retirement Systems are parties needed for the just adjudication of the controversy as contemplated under LSA-C.C.P. art. 641.
With regard to the City/Parish, the City/Parish is not a recipient of the BREC taxes, and we cannot say that the joinder of the City/Parish is needed for just adjudication. See LSA-C.C.P. art. 641. We also note that the City/Parish has not intervened, filed an appeal, or otherwise claimed an interest relating to the subject matter of this action.
At the hearing, the Retirement Systems argued that they have an interest in the litigation; the funds at issue have been used for the pension funds for three decades; they are indispensable to the resolution of the matter; and they should have been named initially by BREC.
Furthermore, besides injunctive relief, BREC has requested declaratory relief from the trial court. When declaratory relief is sought, Louisiana law mandates that "all persons shall be made parties who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the declaration, and no declaration shall prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the proceeding." LSA-C.C.P. art. 1880; Grezaffi , 2023 WL 2806604 at *7. An affected, interested person must be cited in a declaratory judgment action when his existence and claim are evident. Grezaffi, 2023 WL 2806604 at *7.
Thus, exercising our supervisory jurisdiction, we grant the writ application and find that the trial court abused its discretion and erred as a matter of law in denying the Sheriff's peremptory exception raising the objection of nonjoinder of the Assessors' Retirement Fund, Clerks' of Court Retirement and Relief Fund, District Attorneys' Retirement System, Municipal Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana, Registrars' of Voters Employees' Retirement System, and Sheriffs' Pension and Relief Fund. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of the trial court. Further, having vacated the trial court's judgment, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Retirement Systems. This matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, we grant the writ application filed by the Sheriff, finding that the trial court erred in failing to sustain the Sheriff's peremptory exception raising the objection of the nonjoinder of the Assessors' Retirement Fund, Clerks' of Court Retirement and Relief Fund, District Attorneys' Retirement System, Municipal Employees' Retirement System of Louisiana, Registrars' of Voters Employees' Retirement System, and Sheriffs' Pension and Relief Fund. We vacate the January 10, 2023 judgment of the trial court and remand this matter to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. All costs of this appeal in the amount of $2,617.00 are assessed to the Recreation and Park Commission for the Parish of East Baton Rouge.
WRIT GRANTED, JUDGMENT VACATED, APPEAL DISMISSED, AND CASE REMANDED.