Writ application denied.
The defendant in this summary judgment action was a purchaser/assignee of a gas contract with the plaintiff, the St. Bernard Parish government. The underlying dispute that gave rise to the litigation is whether the defendant/purchaser is responsible for prior franchise fees incurred by the plaintiff. The contract does not specifically address franchise fees, but does specifically exclude “accounts owing” and “all other liabilities and obligations, whether known or unknown.” Franchise fees clearly fall under these exclusions. In this regard, there is no question of material fact, and defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. La. C.C.P. art. 966(B). Therefore, I would grant defendants motion for summary judgment.
Genovese, J., would grant and assigns reasons.