Opinion
2021 CA 0879
09-16-2022
MARINA MIKHAILOVA AND ACCESSIBLE CACHE, LLC v. BULLHORN PROMOTIONS, LLC D/B/A RK SALES & CONSULTING
Jill Craft W. Brett Conrad, Jr. Baton Rouge, LA Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellees, Marina Mikhailova and Accessible Cache, LLC Gregory S. Webb Prairieville, LA Attorney for Defendants-Appellants, Bullhorn Promotions, LLC d/b/a RK Sales &Consulting and Ryan Kampff
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
On Appeal from the 19th Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Trial Court No. 661134 Honorable William A. Morvant, Judge Presiding
Jill Craft W. Brett Conrad, Jr. Baton Rouge, LA Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellees, Marina Mikhailova and Accessible Cache, LLC
Gregory S. Webb Prairieville, LA Attorney for Defendants-Appellants, Bullhorn Promotions, LLC d/b/a RK Sales &Consulting and Ryan Kampff
BEFORE: THERIOT, CHUTZ, AND HESTER, JJ.
HESTER, J.
In this defamation matter, defendants, Ryan Kampff and Bullhorn Promotions, LLC, appeal a judgment awarding plaintiffs, Marina Mikhailova and her business Accessible Cache, LLC, damages for defamation based on a "complaint review" posted on an internet site. For the following reasons, we grant defendants' motion to dismiss the appeal.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On September 5, 2017, Ms. Mikhailova and Accessible Cache filed a petition against Mr. Kampff and Bullhorn Promotions seeking damages for statements made by defendants on a website named the "Ripoff Report" that she alleged were defamatory. Defendants answered the suit and the matter eventually came before the court for a jury trial on September 8, 9, and 10, 2020. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury awarded plaintiffs $2,000,000.00 in damages. Thereafter, defendants filed a Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict; Motion for New Trial or Motion for Remittur/Additur. After a hearing on the motion, the trial court denied defendants' motion as it related to the jury's finding of liability, but amended the jury's award of damages to $353,350.00. An amended judgment reflecting the trial court's amendment of the damages was signed on March 30, 2021, and defendants appealed this judgment. On July 27, 2022, approximately one week prior to the matter being scheduled for oral argument, defendants filed an ex parte motion to dismiss the appeal.
DISCUSSION
Where there has been no timely answer to the appeal or other formal action to amend or modify the judgment on appeal, the appellant may, by ex parte motion, have the appeal dismissed with leave of court. Uniform Rules-Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-8.4. In the instant appeal, plaintiffs have not answered the appeal or sought to amend or modify the judgment on appeal. Accordingly, we grant defendants' motion to dismiss the appeal. See Heine v. City/Parish of East Baton Rouge, 2001-1927 (La.App. 1st Cir. 9/27/02), 835 So.2d 558, 559-560.
CONCLUSION
For the above and foregoing reasons, defendants' motion to dismiss the appeal is granted, and defendants' appeal of the March 30, 2021 judgment is dismissed. Costs of this appeal are assessed against Ryan Kampff and Bullhorn Promotions, LLC.
APPEAL DISMISSED.