Preview:

FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE #025 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

The Opinions handed down on the 5th day of May, 2009, are as follows:

BY WEIMER, J.:

2008-C -2223

MONIQUE BOSSIERE DEJOIE v. THE HONORABLE LLOYD J. MEDLEY, JR., ET AL. (Parish of Orleans) For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the ruling of the court of appeal and reinstate the judgment of the trial court granting the State's motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff's suit. REVERSED. TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT REINSTATED. JOHNSON, J., dissents and assigns reasons. VICTORY, J., dissents and assigns reasons.

05/05/09 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 08-C-2223 MONIQUE BOSSIERE DEJOIE VERSUS THE HONORABLE LLOYD J. MEDLEY, JR., ET AL.
On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans

WEIMER, Justice This matter is before this court following a motion for summary judgment filed by the State of Louisiana, the sole remaining defendant, seeking dismissal of plaintiff's suit alleging gender and pregnancy discrimination based on the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law (LEDL). LSA-R.S. 23:301, et seq. The appellate court reversed the trial court judgment in favor of the State. The State applied for writ of certiorari which this court granted. For reasons that follow, we reverse the ruling of the court of appeal and reinstate the decision of the trial court granting the State's motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff's suit. We find that for the purposes of the LEDL, plaintiff is not a state employee because the State did not provide compensation to the plaintiff. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Monique Bossiere Dejoie began working as a clerk in the Civil District

Court (CDC) for the Parish of Orleans on October 23, 1995. Initially she worked with Judge Niles Hellmers. In January 1997, plaintiff was assigned to Division D as a minute clerk and worked with Judge Lloyd Medley, Jr. At all times pertinent to this litigation, Ms. Dejoie was paid through the Judicial Expense Fund (JEF). In January 2000, she took a maternity leave of absence. In early 2003 she again became pregnant. On May 21, 2003, the employees who were paid through the JEF were notified by letter that paid short-term disability benefits would be discontinued subject to one exception. Any employee having a surgical procedure prior to July 1, 2003, and any employee delivering a baby before year-end would be permitted to exercise a one-time short-term disability option provided the request was submitted on or before May 30, 2003. Ms. Dejoie complied and was granted a sixty-day leave. Having experienced complications with her pregnancy, Ms. Dejoie submitted a request that her paid short-term disability be extended an additional 60 days. During the October 2003 meeting, the court sitting en banc denied that request. However, Ms. Dejoie was granted an extended unpaid leave of absence. During the time Ms. Dejoie was on extended leave, Judge Medley restructured his office. Upon her return, Ms. Dejoie was notified that the position of minute clerk had been eliminated. Plaintiff filed a claim alleging gender and pregnancy discrimination based on the provisions of the LEDL,1 naming as defendants, the Honorable Lloyd J. Medley, Jr., the Judicial Expense Fund of the CDC for the Parish of Orleans, and the State of Louisiana through the CDC for the Parish of Orleans. An amended petition added the judges of the CDC for the Parish of Orleans and the First and
1

LSA-R.S. 23:301, et seq. 2

Second City Courts of New Orleans sitting "En Banc," as well as numerous individual judges. Following a series of motions, exceptions, and trial court rulings, the parties filed for supervisory writs. After all the judges of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal recused themselves, this court reassigned the case to the Second Circuit Court of Appeal. The writs were converted to an appeal. The appellate court reversed the granting of the exception of lack of procedural capacity of the State through the CDC, reversed the denial of the exception of lack of procedural capacity of the JEF, affirmed the granting of the exception of lack of procedural capacity to the Judges en banc, and, on its own motion, held that plaintiff failed to state a cause of action as to the individual judges. The district court judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. Dejoie v. Medley, 41,333 (La.App. 2 Cir. 12/20/06), 945 So.2d 968. Following that decision by the Second Circuit, the State of Louisiana was the only remaining defendant in the lawsuit. Subsequently, the State filed a motion for summary judgment alleging that pursuant to the definition of "employer" contained in the LEDL, the State was not plaintiff's employer as it did not give compensation to plaintiff and did not receive services from plaintiff. The trial court conducted a hearing on the motion for summary judgment, granted the State's motion and dismissed plaintiff's suit. Plaintiff appealed. Because of the recusal of the judges of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal, this court again transferred the case to the Second Circuit Court of Appeal. The appellate court found that the judges of the CDC, as members of the state judiciary, paid plaintiff's salary from the JEF for work performed for the
3

court. Thus, the court reasoned that the State received services from the plaintiff and in return gave her compensation. Finding the State was plaintiff's employer for purposes of the LEDL, the court of appeal reversed. Dejoie v. Medley, 43,448 (La.App. 2 Cir. 8/13/08), 990 So.2d 1291. The State applied for a writ of certiorari which this court granted to determine the propriety of the decision of the court of appeal. Dejoie v. Medley, 08-2223 (La. 11/26/08), 997 So.2d 540. DISCUSSION In brief to this court, the State argues the appellate court erred in holding the State gave plaintiff compensation and in concluding the State was plaintiff's employer for the purposes of the LEDL. The State argues it did not provide plaintiff with wages, benefits, or any other form of compensation. The plaintiff argues, consistently with the court of appeal's finding, that the source of the funds used to pay her compensation is irrelevant. The plaintiff argues the judges of the CDC are part of the state judiciary and each judge is an agent of the State. By providing services to the judiciary, plaintiff claims she is providing services to the State. Since the judges control expenditure of the funds in the JEF, plaintiff contends it is the State through the CDC that gives her compensation. We are called upon to determine whether plaintiff, who was employed to work with a judge of the CDC of the Parish of Orleans and who was paid compensation from funds in the JEF, is an employee of the State based on the provisions of the LEDL, now LSA-R.S. 23:301, et seq.2 We look to the following
2

Prior to 1997, Louisiana's employment discrimination law was found in LSA-R.S. 23:1006-1008. LSA-R.S. 23:1006-1008 was repealed by 1997 La. Acts, No. 1409

Download 2008-C-2223 MONIQUE BOSSIERE DEJOIE v. THE HONORABLE LLOYD J. MEDLEY, JR., ET AL

Louisiana Law