Hills v. PAC Housing Group, LLC et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

ORDER & REASONS
Before the Court is defendant Richard Hamlet’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule
12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim, seeking dismissal of
plaintiffs’ “aiding and abetting” claim against him.
1
Hamlet argues that this claim must be
dismissed because Louisiana law does not recognize an independent cause of action for “aiding
and abetting.”
2
Plaintiffs Alvin Hills, Donnell Matlock, and Jack Martin, on behalf of themselves
and all other similarly situated (“Plaintiffs”), respond in opposition, arguing that they do not allege
“aiding and abetting” as a stand-alone claim, but rather that Hamlet aided and abetted the other
defendants – companies he owned and managed – in committing the underlying tort of negligent
or intentional misrepresentation.
3
Hamlet replies in further support of his motion, arguing that
Plaintiffs’ operative complaint alleges conspiracy as the underlying tort for Hamlet’s “aiding and
abetting,” which is impermissible.
4

In the amended complaint, Plaintiffs allege that Hamlet aided and abetted the other
defendants in committing the tort of negligent or intentional misrepresentation when the

1
R. Doc. 36.
2
Id.
3
R. Doc. 38.
4
R. Doc. 39.
ALVIN HILLS, INDIVIDUALLY AND
ON BEHALF OF OTHERS
SIMILARLY SITUATED

VERSUS

PAC HOUSING GROUP, LLC, et al.
CIVIL ACTION

NO. 23-5740

SECTION M (4)
Case 2:23-cv-05740-BWA-KWR Document 40 Filed 04/05/24 Page 1 of 2

2
defendants, through Hamlet, made such representations to tenants, prospective tenants, and the
federal government.
5
To be sure, Plaintiffs specifically allege that “Hamlet and the [defendants]
either negligently or in the alternative intentionally made the misrepresentations set forth above”
– a reference to the preceding count alleging the negligent or intentional misrepresentation claims
against the defendants.
6
Properly read, then, notwithstanding Plaintiffs’ label of the count against
Hamlet, the claim alleged is one for negligent or intentional misrepresentation, with the phrase
“aiding and abetting” indicating that the tort was committed jointly with the other defendants.
These allegations are sufficient to survive Hamlet’s motion to dismiss.
Accordingly, for th
e foregoing reasons,
IT IS ORDERED that Hamlet’s motion to dismiss (R. Doc. 36) is DENIED.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 4
th

day of April, 2024.
________________________________
BARRY W. ASHE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
5
R. Doc. 35 at 31-32, 55-56.
6
Id. at 56.
Case 2:23-cv-05740-BWA-KWR Document 40 Filed 04/05/24 Page 2 of 2