13.6.6 Preclusion

Res judicata and collateral estoppel issues may arise when the landlord has obtained an eviction judgment. In Miller v. Hartwood Apartments, the court held that a Mississippi eviction court judgment did not bar the federal court litigation of a § 1983 claim because the tenants’ constitutional claims could not have been litigated in the eviction lawsuit.1  While Louisiana tenants’ damage claims (under civil rights law or otherwise) cannot be litigated in summary eviction proceedings, discrimination can be asserted as an eviction defense in Louisiana.2  However, if an eviction is brought as an ordinary action, failure to raise a damages claim in a reconventional demand may act as res judicata.3

To avoid issue preclusion problems, you should file a housing discrimination lawsuit before the landlord files an eviction lawsuit and obtain a state court lis pendens or federal court injunction against any eviction.4

The Rooker-Feldman doctrine may also bar an FHA suit.5

• 1689 F.2d 1239 (5th Cir. 1982). Where a state court procedure permits counterclaims for equitable or monetary relief in an eviction, the eviction judgment may constitute res judicata. See, e.g., Poindexter v. Allegheny Cnty. Hous. Auth., 329 F. App’x 347 (3d Cir. 2009).
• 2Mascaro v. Hudson, 496 So. 2d 428 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1986); Renewal Homes v. Laneheart, 2017-0199 (La. App. 4 Cir. 10/18/17), 316 So. 3d 936.
• 3Lafreniere Park Found. v. Broussard, 221 F.3d 804 (5th Cir. 2000).
• 4If the eviction court overrules the exception of lis pendens, a supervisory writ is available. See Dean v. Delacroix Corp., 2003-1352 (La. App. 4 Cir. 08/27/03), 853 So. 2d 769. However, because of the typical speed of summary eviction proceedings in which the court may overrule the exception and then immediately (i.e., at the same hearing) proceed to a trial on the merits. You should ask the court to stay the merits trial for a brief period to allow you to apply for a supervisory writ, but should also be prepared to go forward with the merits trial if the court refuses.
• 5For more detailed discussion of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine in housing cases, see Section 8.2.3.