Smith & Fawer, LLC

Entergy wants to build power lines for Meta’s data center. These landowners are fighting back.

2026-09-16T14:19:18Z

CALHOUN BRAKE, La. — A baby alligator scrambled off a log as Parnell Perry weaved his mud boat through the swamp, bumping into the occasional cypress tree. Dragonflies buzzed lazily in the August afternoon heat. Parnell’s father, Harvey Perry, sat on the bow. As the boat arrived at a clearing, the landscape changed abruptly. Towering electrical transmission lines — ”high lines,” as Parnell calls them — came into view above. The swamp is more than 30 miles northwest of Meta’s $50 billion “Hyperion” data center, in Holly Ridge. But the effects of the massive data center are already being felt here. Contractors turned a property down the road into a dirt pit, and they’ve been hauling earth to a site next door to the property, where Entergy is building a new substation. Now, the Perry family is fighting in court with Entergy over whether the utility should be able to use eminent domain laws to overtake land and force its way through the Brake — and Parnell’s backyard — to build a series of new transmission lines to power Meta’s data center. Doing so would require clearing part of the swamp. Ultimately, Entergy would extend the clearing to build another set of lines next to the existing ones. Click here to read the full news story

After Trial, Church Property Awarded $17.5+ Million More than City’s 175K Deposit

2026-09-09T11:04:57Z

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that there be judgment in favor of Defendant/Plaintiff-in-Reconvention, COGIC, and against Plaintiff/Defendant-in-Reconvention, the City/Parish, and finds that the City/Parish failed to deposit sufficient just compensation for COGIC’s losses caused as a result of the City/Parish’s expropriation of COGIC’s property, the court finding that just compensation to be paid by the City/Parish to COGIC is $17,728,323.00. Read Full News Story Here Read the Full Judgment Here

SWB Ordered to Pay Millions to Property Owners After Nearly 10 Year Battle

2026-09-08T18:13:26Z

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the annual installment payable with respect to the Smith & Fawer Mandamus Plaintiffs shall be TWO MILLION THIRTY-NINE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE AND 03/100 DOLLARS ($,2 039,955.03), representing one-sixth of the total amount due as of August 15, 2026. Beginning with the installment due on August 15, 2027, and for all future installments, Defendant shall also pay judicial interest accrued on the unpaid principal balance since the immediately preceding installment, calculated at the applicable judicial interest rate established by Louisiana law. Read the Full Appeal From

Smith & Fawer Overturns Ruling Against Palace Cafe Owners

2026-09-16T23:00:57Z

This consolidated appeal arises from a dispute over the interpretation of a commercial lease (the “Lease”) of a building and land (the “Property”) which gave Appellant and the lessee, Cousins Restaurants, Inc. (“Cousins”), the option to purchase the Property from Appellee and lessor, Philip Werlein, Ltd. (“PWL”), at the end of the thirty-five-year term of the lease for the Property’s fair market value, determined by appraisal as set forth in the Lease. The parties could not agree on whether the appraised value of the Property included the value of the improvements made by Cousins at Cousins’ sole expense during the term of the Lease. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of PWL, holding that the value of the Property includes the value of the improvements made by Cousins. Cousins appeals the district court’s ruling granting summary judgment in favor of PWL, denying Cousins’ motion for summary judgment in favor of PWL, and denying Cousins’ motion for new trial. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the district court’s judgment granting PWL’s motion for summary judgment; we affirm the district court’s judgment denying Cousins’ motion for summary judgment; and we pretermit review of the district court’s judgment denying Cousins’ motion for new trial as moot. The matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Read the Full News Story Here Read the Full Appeal From

Smith & Fawer Secures Jury Win Dismissing Multimillion $ Claims

2026-09-03T20:35:51Z

After a 4-day trial, the Firm succeeded in convincing a federal jury that a local construction firm had no liability for breach of contract or fiduciary duty to its out-of-state partner, whose claims would have totaled over $6 million. No appeal was taken from the jury’s verdict.

“We are thrilled for our client, one of the most respected construction firms in the region,” said Randall A. Smith, who together with Dylan T. Leach of Smith & Fawer LLC, convinced the panel of Eastern District of Louisiana jurors to unanimously absolve The McDonnel Group, LLC of the claims submitted to the jury by Archer Western Contractors, LLC.

Read the Jury Verdict Form

DOTD Pays Nearly $3 Million—Over 10 Times Original Offer—On Eve of Land Expropriation Trial

2026-09-03T20:37:01Z

Just before trial was set to begin, a significant settlement was reached in a high-stakes expropriation case involving the State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD). The dispute centered on DOTD’s taking of two parcels from the landowner’s 50-acre tract in Lake Charles to facilitate the relocation of the Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal District’s railroad track and complete the Nelson Road Extension tie-in with W. Sallier Street. DOTD initially offered $269,843.00 for the property. But on the eve of trial, the agency agreed to pay an additional $2.65 million, bringing the total compensation to $2,919,843.00—more than ten times the original offer. The final settlement reflects the landowner’s longstanding position that the expropriated property was substantially undervalued and that the taking resulted in significant damages. The outcome ensures that the landowner receives just compensation, consistent with the protections afforded under the Louisiana Constitution. The Consent Judgment, now final and recorded in Calcasieu Parish, acknowledges this full settlement sum as full compensation not only for the property taken but also for severance damages, economic losses, and all related claims. Read the full Consent Judgment here: Consent-Judgment

Architectural Firm Vindicated on Summary Judgment

2026-09-08T18:20:20Z

A federal judge has thrown out copyright infringement, conspiracy and all other accusations made by a developer against a New Orleans architectural firm and others, providing the defendants a clean win on summary judgment and dismissing a +$4,000,000 claim without a trial. “We are thrilled for our client, one of the most respected architectural firms in the region,” said Randall A. Smith, who together with Andre M. Stolier of Smith & Fawer LLC, convinced Eastern District of Louisiana Judge Greg Guidry that architect John Williams and his firm did no wrong. Read more here: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LSU Dentistry Student Prevails

2026-09-08T18:22:14Z

Smith & Fawer is proud to have successfully defended a Louisiana State University School of Dentistry student against serious allegations of academic misconduct that threatened the student’s education and future career.

The student was accused of cheating during a final exam—despite full compliance with LSUSD’s testing protocols, which were inconsistently applied and poorly communicated. Facing potential suspension or expulsion, the student turned to Smith & Fawer for representation.

Smith & Fawer zealously advocated for the student throughout the disciplinary process and worked diligently to ensure a full and fair review of the facts. After a thorough evaluation of the evidence—including video footage, witness testimony, and written documentation—the charges were ultimately dismissed and the allegations rejected as entirely unsupported by any reliable evidence.

As a result, our client remains enrolled at LSUSD in good standing, with an academic record unblemished by unfounded allegations.

Smith & Fawer remains committed to protecting the rights of students and professionals in high-stakes disciplinary matters and to ensuring that such proceedings are rooted in fairness, due process, and evidence—not assumptions.

Louisiana Supreme Court rules that Ed Orgeron’s ex-wife deserves $8 million from LSU buyout

2026-09-08T18:18:46Z

The Louisiana Supreme Court handed down a ruling Friday that said Ed Orgeron's ex-wife, Kelly Orgeron, is entitled to half the money that the coach received from his LSU buyout, awarding her $8.13 million. The state's high court pointed to language in Ed Orgeron's term sheet with LSU that said it was a legally binding contract when he signed it Jan. 14, 2020, at the time he and his wife were still married. Orgeron filed for divorce 43 days after signing the deal. That contract included provisions for the coach's buyout if he was fired without cause, which happened the next year in 2021. Read the full article here

Smith & Fawer Secures Reversal in High-Stakes Legal Malpractice Case Affirming the Right of Those Launching Businesses Startups

2026-09-08T18:17:51Z

In a far-reaching decision, Smith & Fawer, LLC has won the overturning of a dismissed case involving a complex legal malpractice matter particularly addressing business startups that are destroyed before opening their doors. The firm’s recent, pivotal victory before the Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal reinstated their client’s claims and affirmed the right of injured parties to seek redress even when their businesses never got the chance to launch. The client sought to launch a distinctive entertainment venue in downtown New Orleans, inspired by similar successful ventures in other cities. The trial court dismissed the case on summary judgment after excluding two expert witnesses – an industry veteran and a forensic accountant – and then ruling the case was too weak without expert support. Smith & Fawer successfully challenged the exclusions and the summary judgment ruling, showing the experts’ qualifications and methodologies were sound and their exclusions were a clear abuse of discretion and that the trial court improperly usurped the jury’s role by depriving the startup the opportunity to present its case. Read more here