Pratt v. City of Monroe — Second injury suit dismissed as time-barred

Case
Naterria Pratt v. The City of Monroe and Johnny Stevenson
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit
Judge
Robinson, J.
Date Decided
August 26, 2026
Docket No.
57,054-CA
Topics
Prescription; Government claims; Service of process
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Naterria Pratt alleged that a City of Monroe streetsweeper driven by city employee Johnny Stevenson backed into her vehicle on December 21, 2023, causing personal injuries. She filed her first suit against the City and Stevenson on December 18, 2024, but withheld service.

Pratt filed a second suit on October 10, 2025. Six days later, the trial court dismissed the first suit without prejudice after sustaining an exception based on insufficient service and granting an involuntary dismissal. The City and Stevenson then asserted that the second suit was prescribed because the first action did not interrupt or suspend prescription.

The Court’s Holding

The court affirmed dismissal of the second suit with prejudice. Pratt’s claim was subject to the one-year prescriptive period in effect when the accident occurred; Louisiana’s later-enacted two-year period applies only prospectively to delictual actions arising after July 1, 2024.

Under the Louisiana Governmental Claims Act, Monroe is a political subdivision and Stevenson is its employee. Because Pratt’s first suit was dismissed for failure to timely request service under La. R.S. 13:5107(D), subsection (D)(3) barred that filing from interrupting or suspending prescription against either defendant. The fact that Pratt filed the second suit before the first was dismissed did not change the result.

Key Takeaways

  • A municipality and its employee fall within La. R.S. 13:5107(D)’s service-request requirements.
  • Dismissal under that statute prevents the original suit from interrupting or suspending prescription against the governmental defendants.
  • Filing a duplicative suit while the first suit remains pending does not preserve the claim after a qualifying service-based dismissal.

Why It Matters

The decision applies the Louisiana Supreme Court’s interpretation of La. R.S. 13:5107(D)(3) to municipal defendants. Plaintiffs suing governmental entities or their employees must timely request service or risk losing the benefit of a timely-filed petition for prescription purposes.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top