Brady v. St. John the Baptist Parish Council et al

Filing 22

ORDER & REASONS: denying 10 Motion for Mediation Process. Signed by Judge Carl Barbier on 9/11/14. (sek)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

BRADY

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO: 14-1613

ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST PARISH
COUNCIL ET AL.

SECTION: "J”(3)

ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a Motion for Mediation Process (Rec.
Doc. 10) filed by Plaintiff Ashley Ann Brady and Defendants'
opposition thereto. (Rec. Doc. 13) Having considered the motion
and memoranda of the parties, the record, and the applicable law,
the Court finds that the motion should be DENIED for the reasons
set forth more fully below.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND BACKGROUND FACTS
This action arises out of Plaintiff’s claims against St.
John

the

Baptist

Council

and

three

of

its

members,

Marvin

Perrilloux, Virgil Rayneri, and Whitney Joseph, Jr., who she
alleges

are

liable

for

violations

1

of

her

rights

under

the

Fourteenth Amendment by denying access to her house and land
located at 185 West 16th St. in Reserve, Louisiana. (Rec. Doc. 1,
p. 1)
On July 14, 2014, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed suit
against St. John the Baptist Parish Council and three of its
members. (Rec. Doc. 1) In her complaint, Plaintiff asserts that
her house and land are not accessible from the north, south,
east, and west directions to emergency response vehicles. (Rec.
Doc. 1, p.1)

Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that on June 20,

2014 and on July 4, 2014, Acadian Ambulance Emergency Services
were unable to access her property at 185 West 16th St. (Rec.
Doc. 1, p. 3) Plaintiff further alleges that both her and the
emergency
violates

vehicles'
her

rights

inability
under

to
the

access

185

Fourteenth

16th

St.

Amendment,

the

West

Thirteenth Amendment, and the Equal Protection Clause of the
United States Constitution, and Defendants are negligent in not
providing emergency access to 185 West 16th St. (Rec. Doc. 1, p.
4-5)
Defendants filed a Motion for Extension of Time to Answer
(Rec. Doc. 6), which the Court granted on July 23, 2014. (Rec.
Doc. 7) Plaintiff then filed the instant motion, seeking an order
to

compel

mediation.

(Rec.

Doc.

2

10)

Subsequently,

Defendants

filed their opposition to Plaintiff’s motion. (Rec. Doc. 13) 22)
PARTIES' ARGUMENTS
Plaintiff urges the Court to order or compel mediation.
Plaintiff asserts that she will “voluntarily dismiss” her claims
against Defendants when access to her home and land located at
185 West 16th St. is granted to all emergency response vehicles
without restriction by way of an alleged St. John the Baptist
Parish Utilities servitude.
Defendants’ opposition stresses that there is no Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure that “allows a party to unilaterally
demand

mediation

in

any

proceeding.”

Furthermore,

Defendants

assert that although Plaintiff may have legitimate concerns, it
appears that she has sued the wrong parties. Defendants urge the
Court to deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Mediation Process.
LEGAL STANDARD & DISCUSSION
A

court

may

grant

a

motion

to

compel

mediation1

or

arbitration when the parties have previously entered into an
arbitration or mediation agreement. See, e.g., Patriot Constr. &
Equip., L.L.C. v. Quad States Constr., No. 2:13-cv-1529, 2014 WL
1340035, at *2 (W.D. La. Apr. 2, 2014); Office VP, LLC v. Ideal

1

The cases cited herein examine whether to compel arbitration. Although
some cases address whether to compel both arbitration and mediation, there does
not appear to be a specific analysis for agreements to mediate.

3

Health, Inc., No. A-11-CV-741 LY, 2012 WL 787041, at *6-7 (W.D.
Tex. Mar. 6, 2012); Quick Print of New Orleans, Inc. v. Danka
Office Imaging Co., No. Civ.A. 04-644, 2004 WL 1488656, at *1-2
(E.D. La. June 30, 2012). Generally, when considering a motion to
compel arbitration based on a preexisting agreement, a court will
begin by assessing whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)
covers the contract between the parties. Quick Print of New
Orleans,

2004

WL

1488656,

at

*1-2

(concluding

that

the

FAA

applies because the contract involved interstate commerce and
fell within the reach of the Commerce Clause). Next, a court will
determine “(1) whether there is a valid arbitration agreement
between the parties; and (2) whether the dispute in question
falls within the scope of the agreement." Quick Print of New
Orleans, 2004 WL 1488656, at *2 (quoting Fleetwood Enters. v.
Gaskamp, 280 F.3d 1069, 1072 (5th Cir. 2002)).
Absent a preexisting arbitration or mediation agreement,

a

court may order mediation with the parties' consent. According to
Article 4 of the Eastern District of Louisiana’s Civil Justice
Expense and Delay Reduction Plan, "[i]f the presiding judicial
officer determines at any time that the case will benefit from
alternative dispute resolution, the judicial officer shall . . .
have discretion to refer the case to private mediation, if the
4

parties consent."2 Although other districts may allow a judicial
official to order mediation without the consent of both parties,3
the plain language of the Eastern District of Louisiana’s plan
suggests that the court may refer the case to mediation only with
both parties' consent.
Here, Plaintiff urges the Court to order or compel mediation
but does not identify any agreement between the parties that
would permit such action. Thus, the Court cannot compel mediation
in this case based upon any preexisting agreement. See Quick
Print of New Orleans, 2004 WL 1488656, at *1-2. Furthermore,
although

the

arbitration,

Court
the

has

parties

the
must

ability
consent

to
to

refer
such

a

case

to

action.

As

established by Defendants’ opposition to the motion, all parties
do not agree that mediation is the proper avenue for dispute
resolution in this case. (Rec. Doc. 13, p. 1) Therefore, this
Court declines to grant the request to compel mediation.

2

This rule is reflected by Local Civil Rule of the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana 16.3.1.
3

The Northern District of Texas’ Civil Justice Expense and Delay Reduction
Plan provides that “[a] judge may refer a case to ADR on the motion of any party,
on the agreement of the parties, or on the Judge's own motion.” See Nat'l Ctr.
for Policy Analysis v. Fiscal Associates, Inc., No. 97- 660, 2002 WL 433038, at
* 9 (N.D. Tex. Mar. 15, 2002)(quoting Northern District Civil Justice Expense and
Delay Reduction Plan § IIIA).

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Mediation
Process (Rec. Doc. 10) is DENIED.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 11th day of September, 2014.

____________________________
CARL J. BARBIER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE