Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Andrew Richard Early, III v. Lolalisa Clark - S...
Priority review Enforcement Amended Final

Andrew Richard Early, III v. Lolalisa Clark - Succession Dispute

Favicon for www.courtlistener.com Louisiana Court of Appeal
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The Louisiana Court of Appeal vacated in part a district court's judgment regarding necessary parties in a succession dispute. The court found that the succession of Katie King was not an indispensable party, but the succession representative of Lolalisa Clark is necessary for adjudication.

Published by LA Courts on courtlistener.com . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

What changed

The Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit, granted in part and denied in part a writ concerning a district court's judgment in the succession dispute between Andrew Richard Early, III, and the Unopened Succession of Lolalisa Clark. The appellate court vacated the district court's finding that the succession of Katie King was a necessary party, stating the burden of proof for such an exception was not met. However, the court affirmed that the succession representative of Lolalisa Clark is indispensable for a complete adjudication, citing Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure articles regarding necessary parties and the appointment of attorneys to represent deceased defendants.

This ruling clarifies the procedural requirements for identifying indispensable parties in succession cases within Louisiana. Legal professionals involved in estate litigation must ensure they properly identify and include all necessary parties, such as succession representatives, to avoid judgments being vacated. Failure to meet this burden of proof could lead to delays and require re-litigation. The court's decision emphasizes the importance of adhering to procedural rules for equitable adjudication.

What to do next

  1. Review case filings for proper identification of indispensable parties in succession matters.
  2. Ensure succession representatives are properly named and served as defendants.
  3. Consult Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure articles 734 and 5091 for guidance on necessary parties and representation of deceased defendants.

Archived snapshot

Mar 24, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

Jump To

Top Caption Combined Opinion The text of this document was obtained by analyzing a scanned document and may have typos.

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project
, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

March 23, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

Andrew Richard Early, III v. The Unopened Succession of Lolalisa Clark

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Combined Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

ANDREW RICHARD EARLY, IIT NO. 2025 CW 1144
VERSUS
THE UNOPENED SUCCESSION OF MARCH 23, 2026

LOLALISA CLARK

In Re: Andrew Richard Early, III, applying for supervisory
writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East
Baton Rouge, No. 731932.

BEFORE: McCLENDON, C.J., LANIER, WOLFE, HESTER AND BALFOUR, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The district court’s
May 6, 2025 judgment is vacated in part. To the extent the district
court found the succession of Katie King was a necessary party,
the judgment is vacated. A party is indispensable only when the
facts clearly establish that no complete and equitable
adjudication of the controversy can be made in his absence. The
burden of proving an exception is on the party asserting it. Carter
v. Baton Rouge City~-Par. Employees' Ret. Sys., 612 So.2d 765, 767
(La. App. Ist Cir. 1992). Defendant failed to introduce evidence
to prove the grounds of its exception as to the succession of Katie
King. The writ is denied in part as to the Unopened Succession of
Lolalisa Clark. The succession representative of that succession
is necessary to a complete adjudication of the claims asserted
herein. The succession representative appointed by a court of
this state is the proper defendant in an action to enforce an
obligation of the deceased or of his succession, while the latter
is under administration. La. Code Civ. P. art. 734. Louisiana
Code of Civil Procedure art. 5091(A) (1) (c) provides that the court
shall appoint an attorney to represent the defendant on petition
or ex parte written motion of the plaintiff when the defendant is
deceased and no succession representative has been appointed.
Subsection (B) further provides for the limited purpose of any
such action or proceeding, the appointed attorney at law shall be
the proper representative of the succession of any such decedent
to the same extent as if he were the regularly appointed and duly
qualified administrator or executor in such decedent's succession.

EW

CHH
Balfour, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. JI concur
in vacating the district court’s May 6, 2025 judgment as to the
succession of Katie King. However, I dissent from the denial of

the writ in part as to the Unopened Succession of Lolalisa Clark.
The burden of proving an exception is on the party asserting it.
Carter v. Baton Rouge City-Par. Employees' Ret. Sys., 612 So.2d
765, 767
(La. App. lst Cir. 1992). Defendant failed to introduce
evidence to prove the grounds of its exception.

McClendon, C.J. and Lanier, J., concur in part and dissent in
part and would deny the writ in its entirety.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
\

FOR THE COURT

Named provisions

Combined Opinion

Get daily alerts for Louisiana Court of Appeal

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from LA Courts.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
LA Courts
Filed
March 23rd, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Document ID
2025 CW 1144
Docket
2025 CW 1144

Who this affects

Applies to
Legal professionals
Activity scope
Estate Litigation
Geographic scope
US-LA US-LA

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Civil Procedure Estate Law

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when Louisiana Court of Appeal publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!