Lexplug logoLexplug

Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Corbello

Louisiana Court of Appeal
1986 La. App. LEXIS 5976, 482 So.2d 203 (1986)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

Attorney's fees are not recoverable for the wrongful seizure of property under a writ of fieri facias unless specifically authorized by statute, and such a seizure does not constitute an unfair trade practice under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices & Consumer Protection Law.


Facts:

  • Albert Corbello executed a promissory note secured by a mortgage on a 1983 Mercury Marquis, which was later assigned to Ford Motor Credit Company (Ford).
  • Albert Corbello defaulted on the note.
  • Eula Corbello, Albert's wife, owned a house as her separate property from before their marriage.
  • On February 7, 1984, Eula Corbello sold her separate property house for $10,000.
  • On the same day, she deposited the proceeds into a new bank account and used those funds to purchase a 1979 Chevrolet, which was registered in her name.
  • Ford's attorney was notified that the 1979 Chevrolet was Eula Corbello's separate property.
  • Despite this notice, Ford seized Eula Corbello's Chevrolet to satisfy the deficiency judgment against her husband, Albert.

Procedural Posture:

  • Ford Motor Credit Company obtained a default judgment against Albert Corbello for a deficiency balance on a car note.
  • To execute the judgment, Ford had the sheriff seize a 1979 Chevrolet registered to Albert's wife, Eula Corbello.
  • The Corbellos obtained a temporary restraining order in the trial court, halting the sale of the Chevrolet.
  • Following a trial on the merits, the trial court issued a permanent injunction, found the seizure to be illegal and wrongful, and awarded Mrs. Corbello special damages, general damages, and attorney's fees.
  • Ford Motor Credit Company, as plaintiff-appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the wrongful seizure of a spouse's separate property to satisfy a debt incurred solely by the other spouse constitute an unfair trade practice under Louisiana law, thereby entitling the owner to an award of attorney's fees?


Opinions:

Majority - Stoker, Judge

No. The wrongful seizure of a spouse's separate property under these circumstances is not an unfair trade practice that would authorize an award of attorney's fees. The court affirmed that the seizure was wrongful because Ford's attorney had notice that the car was Mrs. Corbello's separate property, and malice or bad faith is not required for a wrongful seizure claim. While damages for deprivation of use, humiliation, and mental anxiety are appropriate, attorney's fees are not awarded in Louisiana absent specific statutory authority. The court found no such authority in the Code of Civil Procedure articles governing seizures. It expressly disagreed with sister circuit court decisions, holding that a wrongful seizure conducted under a court-issued writ, even if erroneous, does not constitute an 'unfair or deceptive act or practice in the conduct of trade or commerce' as contemplated by the Unfair Trade Practices & Consumer Protection Law.


Dissenting - Knoll, Judge

Yes. The dissenting judge would have affirmed the trial court's award of attorney's fees. The dissent argued that the court should follow the rationale of other Louisiana appellate circuit courts in cases like Moore v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. and General Inv., Inc. v. Thomas, which held that wrongful seizure does constitute an unfair trade practice, thus justifying an award of attorney's fees under the consumer protection statute.



Analysis:

This decision reinforces the strict Louisiana rule that attorney's fees are not recoverable unless explicitly authorized by a specific statute. It created a split among Louisiana's circuit courts of appeal regarding whether a wrongful seizure under a writ of fieri facias constitutes a violation of the Unfair Trade Practices & Consumer Protection Law. By distinguishing this case (seizure under judicial process) from cases involving extrajudicial repossession, the court narrowed the scope of the Unfair Trade Practices Act in debt collection, making it more difficult for victims of wrongful seizures to be made whole for their litigation expenses.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Corbello (1986) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Corbello