This appeal concerns a summary judgment ruling in a concursus proceeding regarding ownership interests in Lot 4. The Zodiac Group claims ownership based on a 1926 tax sale of the property assessed to Erie White. However, White never owned Lot 4 and notice of the tax sale was not given to the actual record owner. The trial court found the tax sale was an absolute nullity due to lack of notice. The appellate court affirmed, finding that under Mennonite, a tax sale without notice is a violation of due process rendering it a nullity not subject to peremption. As the movers could attack the tax sale as null, summary judgment denying the Zodiac Group's claims was appropriate.
This summary discusses a Louisiana Supreme Court case regarding a 1925 tax sale of property in Jefferson Parish. The Court reversed the lower courts' rulings and found that Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams, which established that failure to provide notice of a tax sale to the property owner violates due process, does not apply retroactively to invalidate the 1925 tax sale for lack of notice. The Court also found that any defect in the tax sale was cured by Louisiana's five-year peremptive period for annulling tax sales. The case involved a dispute over ownership of an oil and gas producing property and which parties were entitled to production proceeds.
PA Superior Court Ruling in Patricia Wright v. Misty Mountain, LLC and Shirle...Marcellus Drilling News
A ruling in an important mineral rights case in Pennsylvania, stemming from the sale of land, but not the oil and gas mineral rights, in 1950 in Bradford County, PA. The court upheld a decision that that the original mineral rights holder retained those rights even after a lease for those rights had expired.
Foreign Relations and the Founding of the American Republic, Drumbeat Vol. 34...Edward Phillips
The document discusses the events leading up to the American Revolution and independence. It summarizes that Parliament passed taxes on the colonies to pay off war debts from the French and Indian War, angering the colonists. Key figures like Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams began advocating resistance. The Continental Congress worked to establish foreign relations and trade to get support for independence. They declared independence on July 2nd, 1776, signaling to countries like France and Spain that they could aid the rebels. While relations were secretive at first, this international support was crucial to America's ability to win the Revolutionary War.
Our American friends are celebrating today the 240th anniversary of their declaration of independence. A little wink then the day of their national holiday.
Tommy D. Overton Jr. has extensive experience as both an attorney and engineer, working across various industries including oil and gas pipeline design, construction, and regulatory compliance. He has owned his own law firm since 2005 focusing on estate planning, taxation, real estate, and intellectual property. He also provides pipeline consulting and expert witness testimony.
Este documento trata sobre la introducción a la tecnología educativa y la informática en la enseñanza. Explica brevemente el origen y evolución de la tecnología educativa, así como los componentes básicos de una computadora como el hardware y el software. También describe el uso de dispositivos tecnológicos en el aula como computadoras, proyectores y plataformas de aprendizaje en línea. Concluye que la tecnología educativa permite a los estudiantes aprender de manera más fácil e interactiva.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a 5-0 ruling last week that upholds the practice of title washing in the Keystone State. Prior to 1948 if mineral rights that had been separated were not properly recorded (it was incumbent on the owner of the subsurface rights to ensure the sale was recorded at the assessor's office), and the surface land was later sold, both the mineral rights (subsurface) and the surface land became part of the sale. That, in essence, was title washing. After 1948 a law prevented this from happening, so such cases only apply to land sold before 1948.
This summary discusses a Louisiana Supreme Court case regarding a 1925 tax sale of property in Jefferson Parish. The Court reversed the lower courts' rulings and found that Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams, which established that failure to provide notice of a tax sale to the property owner violates due process, does not apply retroactively to invalidate the 1925 tax sale for lack of notice. The Court also found that any defect in the tax sale was cured by Louisiana's five-year peremptive period for annulling tax sales. The case involved a dispute over ownership of an oil and gas producing property and which parties were entitled to production proceeds.
PA Superior Court Ruling in Patricia Wright v. Misty Mountain, LLC and Shirle...Marcellus Drilling News
A ruling in an important mineral rights case in Pennsylvania, stemming from the sale of land, but not the oil and gas mineral rights, in 1950 in Bradford County, PA. The court upheld a decision that that the original mineral rights holder retained those rights even after a lease for those rights had expired.
Foreign Relations and the Founding of the American Republic, Drumbeat Vol. 34...Edward Phillips
The document discusses the events leading up to the American Revolution and independence. It summarizes that Parliament passed taxes on the colonies to pay off war debts from the French and Indian War, angering the colonists. Key figures like Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams began advocating resistance. The Continental Congress worked to establish foreign relations and trade to get support for independence. They declared independence on July 2nd, 1776, signaling to countries like France and Spain that they could aid the rebels. While relations were secretive at first, this international support was crucial to America's ability to win the Revolutionary War.
Our American friends are celebrating today the 240th anniversary of their declaration of independence. A little wink then the day of their national holiday.
Tommy D. Overton Jr. has extensive experience as both an attorney and engineer, working across various industries including oil and gas pipeline design, construction, and regulatory compliance. He has owned his own law firm since 2005 focusing on estate planning, taxation, real estate, and intellectual property. He also provides pipeline consulting and expert witness testimony.
Este documento trata sobre la introducción a la tecnología educativa y la informática en la enseñanza. Explica brevemente el origen y evolución de la tecnología educativa, así como los componentes básicos de una computadora como el hardware y el software. También describe el uso de dispositivos tecnológicos en el aula como computadoras, proyectores y plataformas de aprendizaje en línea. Concluye que la tecnología educativa permite a los estudiantes aprender de manera más fácil e interactiva.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a 5-0 ruling last week that upholds the practice of title washing in the Keystone State. Prior to 1948 if mineral rights that had been separated were not properly recorded (it was incumbent on the owner of the subsurface rights to ensure the sale was recorded at the assessor's office), and the surface land was later sold, both the mineral rights (subsurface) and the surface land became part of the sale. That, in essence, was title washing. After 1948 a law prevented this from happening, so such cases only apply to land sold before 1948.
Herder Spring: The Final Word on Title WashingLisa McManus
An overview of unseated tax sale law in Pennsylvania and the Herder Spring Hunting Club v. Keller decision. Prepared for and presented at the Pennsylvania Bar Institute 8th Annual Oil and Gas Law Colloquium in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania on July 27, 2016.
Albert Mackey - History of Freemasonry Vol VI.pdfWagnerDaCruz2
This document summarizes the introduction and establishment of Freemasonry in several US states, including:
- Ohio - The first Grand Lodge was organized in 1808 with representatives from 6 lodges.
- Louisiana - The first lodges were formed in 1793-1794 and were granted charters by South Carolina and France. Political changes led to the organization of the Grand Lodge in 1812.
- It provides details on the early lodges and jurisdictions in each state.
This document summarizes a legal case between Stephen Gaggero and Anna Marie Yura regarding an agreement for Gaggero to purchase property owned by a trust for which Yura became successor trustee. The primary issue was whether Gaggero and the previous trustee, Fredrick Harris, had agreed on conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs) for the property before Harris's death. Following a trial, the court found in favor of Yura, determining that Gaggero and Harris had not finalized the CC&Rs. Gaggero appealed aspects of the judgment and related post-judgment orders.
This document summarizes a court case regarding a dispute over land ownership. The case involved land that was originally owned by Juliana Melliza and was subsequently subdivided and portions were sold or donated to other parties. There was disagreement over whether a 1932 document transferring land from Melliza to the municipality of Iloilo included Lot 1214-B. The trial court found that the 1932 document did include Lot 1214-B in the transfer. The plaintiff, who claimed ownership of Lot 1214-B, appealed the trial court's decision. The appellate court was tasked with interpreting the 1932 contract document to determine what land was intended to be transferred.
Land Law Reform
The Land Act Of 1913 Essay
Land Law 19th Century
Easements Land Law
Land Act Mauritius
South Africa Land Reform Essay
The Law Of The Land
Land Law and Tenant
Why Study Law Essay
32 page document on the history of Oregon real estate, including Bend, OR and Central Oregon. This document is compliments of the state of Oregon real estate agency website, and includes data back to 1919
Validity of Unseated Tax Sales and Title WashingLisa McManus
These materials provide background regarding the law pertaining to unseated tax sales and title washing and an analysis of the Herder Spring Hunting Club v. Keller decision.
This document summarizes a legal case involving a disputed parcel of land. Key points:
- The land was originally owned by Candida Fernandez and passed to her heirs, including respondents, upon her death. However, the land was later forfeited for unpaid taxes.
- One of Fernandez's heirs, Vitaliano Aguirre, redeemed the land and it was agreed it would be held by him until partitioned among the heirs. Respondents later partitioned the land among themselves.
- Petitioners claimed the land was part of the public domain, while respondents argued they had possessory title through occupation since time immemorial.
- The trial court and appellate court both
Creation of legal & equitable interests in landKate Galloway
An introduction to the means of creation of legal & equitable interests in land, focusing on the law in Queensland for old system title. It also provides an overview of old system conveyancing.
The document summarizes a court case regarding a petition to reverse a decision that declared null and void an original land title certificate. Key details:
- The private respondents filed to have the original land title declared null due to issues with the land survey and classification of the land as forest land at the time of registration.
- The trial court sided with the petition, finding the original title invalid due to lack of republication of an amended survey and the land being classified as forest land when registered.
- The Court of Appeals initially affirmed this decision but later reversed itself, disagreeing with the trial court's factual findings, removing the case from the general rule that factual findings of the Court of Appeals bind the Supreme Court.
The document provides background on the French and Indian War and its aftermath, which increased tensions between the British colonies in America and Britain and ultimately led to the American Revolution. It discusses several Acts passed by Britain to raise revenue from the colonies after accumulating debt from the war, including the Stamp Act, Townshend Acts, and Intolerable Acts. It also covers key events that provoked colonial resistance like the Boston Tea Party. The colonies increasingly united in opposition to British policies perceived as a violation of their rights.
HIS 131Chapter 9, 10, & 11I. America’s Economic RevoluSusanaFurman449
HIS 131
Chapter 9, 10, & 11
I. America’s Economic Revolution
There had been signs for many years that the United States was poised for a period of
dramatic economic growth…In the 1820’s and 1830’s, that period finally
began….Improvements in transportation and the expanding range of business activity
created, for the first time, a national market economy.
Each area of the country could concentrate on the production of a certain type of goods,
relying on other areas to buy its surplus production and to supply it with those things it no
longer produced itself.
For example, this regional specialization allowed the South to concentrate on growing its
most lucrative crop…cotton….And, it allowed the North to develop a new factory
system, which began an industrial revolution that would, in time, become even greater
than the one that had begun in England in 1770.
By the mid-1820’s, the nation’s economy was growing more rapidly than its population.
----------------------------------
Many factors combined to produce this dramatic transformation.
The American people were becoming more numerous and were spreading across a far
greater expanse of territory, providing both a labor supply for the production of goods
and a market for the sale of those goods.
A “transportation revolution”…based on the construction of roads, canals, and eventually
railroads…was giving merchants and manufacturers access to new markets and raw
materials….New entrepreneurial techniques were making a rapid business expansion
possible…And, technological advances were helping to spur industry to new levels of
activity.
Perhaps, equally important, Americans in the 1820’s adopted an ethic of growth that was
based on a commitment of hard work, individual initiative, thrift, and ambition…The
results of their efforts seemed to confirm the value of such a commitment.
II. Sectionalism and Nationalism
For a brief but alarming moment during this exciting time of economic revolution, the
increasing differences between the nation’s two leading sections (the North and South)
threatened to damage the unity of the United States.
2
But once a sectional crisis was averted with the Missouri Compromise, the forces of
nationalism continued to assert themselves…And, the federal government began to
assume the role of promoter of economic growth.
A. The Missouri Compromise
When Missouri applied for statehood in 1819, slavery was already well established
there…The French and Spanish inhabitants of the Louisiana Territory (including what
later became Missouri) had owned slaves…And felt that they should continue to do so,
because in the 1803 treaty that had finalized the Louisiana Purchase, the United States
government had promised to maintain and protect the inhabitants in the free enjoyment of
their property
By 1819, approximately 60,000 people resided in the Missouri Territory, of whom 10,000
were slaves.
In that year, while Missouri’s application for statehoo ...
The justice court erred in granting summary judgment for Liberty Realty and denying it for Commission Express in a dispute over an assigned commission. Helen Low, a real estate agent working for Liberty Realty, assigned her right to a $7,180 commission to Commission Express. Commission Express perfected its security interest in the assigned commission by filing financing statements. However, Liberty Realty paid the commission directly to Low instead of Commission Express as required by the assignment. Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, as adopted in Nevada, governs this assignment of an account receivable. Therefore, the justice court should have denied Liberty Realty's motion for summary judgment and granted Commission Express's countermotion.
This document discusses two court cases involving land disputes and contract interpretation.
In the first case, Dignos spouses sold the same parcel of land to two different parties. The court ruled the second sale was void and that the first buyer, Jabil, should regain ownership after reimbursing the second buyers for improvements made.
The second case examined whether a contract was one of sale or agency. Parsons Hardware argued it was an agent selling Quiroga beds, but the court found the contract established Parsons as a purchaser, not agent, as Quiroga set the prices and Parsons was obligated to pay for the beds.
The document discusses several key events and compromises related to the expansion of slavery in the United States between 1818-1857. It summarizes the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, dividing other lands between slave and free. It also discusses the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, and the controversial Dred Scott Supreme Court decision of 1857, each of which further exacerbated tensions between slave and free states leading up to the Civil War.
The document discusses several key events and compromises related to the expansion of slavery in the United States between 1818-1857. It summarizes the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, dividing other lands between slave and free. It also discusses the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, and the controversial Dred Scott Supreme Court decision of 1857, each of which further exacerbated tensions between slave and free states leading up to the Civil War.
The Civil War had many contributing causes over several decades relating to the issues of states' rights and slavery. Key events included the Missouri Compromise of 1820 allowing slavery in some new western territories, the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act as part of the Compromise of 1850 requiring Northern states to return escaped slaves, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 which repealed the Missouri Compromise and led to violent conflicts over whether new states would allow slavery. Tensions escalated further with the Dred Scott decision of 1857 and John Brown's raid in 1859, and finally erupted into war with South Carolina's secession and bombardment of Fort Sumter in 1861 after the election of Abraham Lincoln, who southern
Herder Spring: The Final Word on Title WashingLisa McManus
An overview of unseated tax sale law in Pennsylvania and the Herder Spring Hunting Club v. Keller decision. Prepared for and presented at the Pennsylvania Bar Institute 8th Annual Oil and Gas Law Colloquium in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania on July 27, 2016.
Albert Mackey - History of Freemasonry Vol VI.pdfWagnerDaCruz2
This document summarizes the introduction and establishment of Freemasonry in several US states, including:
- Ohio - The first Grand Lodge was organized in 1808 with representatives from 6 lodges.
- Louisiana - The first lodges were formed in 1793-1794 and were granted charters by South Carolina and France. Political changes led to the organization of the Grand Lodge in 1812.
- It provides details on the early lodges and jurisdictions in each state.
This document summarizes a legal case between Stephen Gaggero and Anna Marie Yura regarding an agreement for Gaggero to purchase property owned by a trust for which Yura became successor trustee. The primary issue was whether Gaggero and the previous trustee, Fredrick Harris, had agreed on conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs) for the property before Harris's death. Following a trial, the court found in favor of Yura, determining that Gaggero and Harris had not finalized the CC&Rs. Gaggero appealed aspects of the judgment and related post-judgment orders.
This document summarizes a court case regarding a dispute over land ownership. The case involved land that was originally owned by Juliana Melliza and was subsequently subdivided and portions were sold or donated to other parties. There was disagreement over whether a 1932 document transferring land from Melliza to the municipality of Iloilo included Lot 1214-B. The trial court found that the 1932 document did include Lot 1214-B in the transfer. The plaintiff, who claimed ownership of Lot 1214-B, appealed the trial court's decision. The appellate court was tasked with interpreting the 1932 contract document to determine what land was intended to be transferred.
Land Law Reform
The Land Act Of 1913 Essay
Land Law 19th Century
Easements Land Law
Land Act Mauritius
South Africa Land Reform Essay
The Law Of The Land
Land Law and Tenant
Why Study Law Essay
32 page document on the history of Oregon real estate, including Bend, OR and Central Oregon. This document is compliments of the state of Oregon real estate agency website, and includes data back to 1919
Validity of Unseated Tax Sales and Title WashingLisa McManus
These materials provide background regarding the law pertaining to unseated tax sales and title washing and an analysis of the Herder Spring Hunting Club v. Keller decision.
This document summarizes a legal case involving a disputed parcel of land. Key points:
- The land was originally owned by Candida Fernandez and passed to her heirs, including respondents, upon her death. However, the land was later forfeited for unpaid taxes.
- One of Fernandez's heirs, Vitaliano Aguirre, redeemed the land and it was agreed it would be held by him until partitioned among the heirs. Respondents later partitioned the land among themselves.
- Petitioners claimed the land was part of the public domain, while respondents argued they had possessory title through occupation since time immemorial.
- The trial court and appellate court both
Creation of legal & equitable interests in landKate Galloway
An introduction to the means of creation of legal & equitable interests in land, focusing on the law in Queensland for old system title. It also provides an overview of old system conveyancing.
The document summarizes a court case regarding a petition to reverse a decision that declared null and void an original land title certificate. Key details:
- The private respondents filed to have the original land title declared null due to issues with the land survey and classification of the land as forest land at the time of registration.
- The trial court sided with the petition, finding the original title invalid due to lack of republication of an amended survey and the land being classified as forest land when registered.
- The Court of Appeals initially affirmed this decision but later reversed itself, disagreeing with the trial court's factual findings, removing the case from the general rule that factual findings of the Court of Appeals bind the Supreme Court.
The document provides background on the French and Indian War and its aftermath, which increased tensions between the British colonies in America and Britain and ultimately led to the American Revolution. It discusses several Acts passed by Britain to raise revenue from the colonies after accumulating debt from the war, including the Stamp Act, Townshend Acts, and Intolerable Acts. It also covers key events that provoked colonial resistance like the Boston Tea Party. The colonies increasingly united in opposition to British policies perceived as a violation of their rights.
HIS 131Chapter 9, 10, & 11I. America’s Economic RevoluSusanaFurman449
HIS 131
Chapter 9, 10, & 11
I. America’s Economic Revolution
There had been signs for many years that the United States was poised for a period of
dramatic economic growth…In the 1820’s and 1830’s, that period finally
began….Improvements in transportation and the expanding range of business activity
created, for the first time, a national market economy.
Each area of the country could concentrate on the production of a certain type of goods,
relying on other areas to buy its surplus production and to supply it with those things it no
longer produced itself.
For example, this regional specialization allowed the South to concentrate on growing its
most lucrative crop…cotton….And, it allowed the North to develop a new factory
system, which began an industrial revolution that would, in time, become even greater
than the one that had begun in England in 1770.
By the mid-1820’s, the nation’s economy was growing more rapidly than its population.
----------------------------------
Many factors combined to produce this dramatic transformation.
The American people were becoming more numerous and were spreading across a far
greater expanse of territory, providing both a labor supply for the production of goods
and a market for the sale of those goods.
A “transportation revolution”…based on the construction of roads, canals, and eventually
railroads…was giving merchants and manufacturers access to new markets and raw
materials….New entrepreneurial techniques were making a rapid business expansion
possible…And, technological advances were helping to spur industry to new levels of
activity.
Perhaps, equally important, Americans in the 1820’s adopted an ethic of growth that was
based on a commitment of hard work, individual initiative, thrift, and ambition…The
results of their efforts seemed to confirm the value of such a commitment.
II. Sectionalism and Nationalism
For a brief but alarming moment during this exciting time of economic revolution, the
increasing differences between the nation’s two leading sections (the North and South)
threatened to damage the unity of the United States.
2
But once a sectional crisis was averted with the Missouri Compromise, the forces of
nationalism continued to assert themselves…And, the federal government began to
assume the role of promoter of economic growth.
A. The Missouri Compromise
When Missouri applied for statehood in 1819, slavery was already well established
there…The French and Spanish inhabitants of the Louisiana Territory (including what
later became Missouri) had owned slaves…And felt that they should continue to do so,
because in the 1803 treaty that had finalized the Louisiana Purchase, the United States
government had promised to maintain and protect the inhabitants in the free enjoyment of
their property
By 1819, approximately 60,000 people resided in the Missouri Territory, of whom 10,000
were slaves.
In that year, while Missouri’s application for statehoo ...
The justice court erred in granting summary judgment for Liberty Realty and denying it for Commission Express in a dispute over an assigned commission. Helen Low, a real estate agent working for Liberty Realty, assigned her right to a $7,180 commission to Commission Express. Commission Express perfected its security interest in the assigned commission by filing financing statements. However, Liberty Realty paid the commission directly to Low instead of Commission Express as required by the assignment. Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, as adopted in Nevada, governs this assignment of an account receivable. Therefore, the justice court should have denied Liberty Realty's motion for summary judgment and granted Commission Express's countermotion.
This document discusses two court cases involving land disputes and contract interpretation.
In the first case, Dignos spouses sold the same parcel of land to two different parties. The court ruled the second sale was void and that the first buyer, Jabil, should regain ownership after reimbursing the second buyers for improvements made.
The second case examined whether a contract was one of sale or agency. Parsons Hardware argued it was an agent selling Quiroga beds, but the court found the contract established Parsons as a purchaser, not agent, as Quiroga set the prices and Parsons was obligated to pay for the beds.
The document discusses several key events and compromises related to the expansion of slavery in the United States between 1818-1857. It summarizes the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, dividing other lands between slave and free. It also discusses the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, and the controversial Dred Scott Supreme Court decision of 1857, each of which further exacerbated tensions between slave and free states leading up to the Civil War.
The document discusses several key events and compromises related to the expansion of slavery in the United States between 1818-1857. It summarizes the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, dividing other lands between slave and free. It also discusses the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, and the controversial Dred Scott Supreme Court decision of 1857, each of which further exacerbated tensions between slave and free states leading up to the Civil War.
The Civil War had many contributing causes over several decades relating to the issues of states' rights and slavery. Key events included the Missouri Compromise of 1820 allowing slavery in some new western territories, the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act as part of the Compromise of 1850 requiring Northern states to return escaped slaves, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 which repealed the Missouri Compromise and led to violent conflicts over whether new states would allow slavery. Tensions escalated further with the Dred Scott decision of 1857 and John Brown's raid in 1859, and finally erupted into war with South Carolina's secession and bombardment of Fort Sumter in 1861 after the election of Abraham Lincoln, who southern
1. QUANTUM RESOURCES MANAGENIENT, NO. ll-CA-813
L.L.C. AND MILAGRO PRODUCING, L.L.C
FIFTH CIRCUIT
VERSUS
COURT OF APPEAL
PIRATE LAKE OIL CORP., ET AL
STATE OF LOUISIANA
ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA
NO. 686-816, DIVISION "M"
HONORABLE HENRY G. SULLIVAN, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING
May 31, 2012
-<
;;.: ~:-').~ c.,.j c.:)
,.,<'"
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
~- ~..,
." ~ ,'; 1
CO')
JUDGE ' c,)' :,
Panel composed ofJudges Clarence E. McManus,
Walter J. Rothschild, and Jude G. Gravois
SIDNEY L. SHUSHAN
JONATHON M. SHUSHAN
Attorneys at Law
1100 Poydras Street
Energy Centre, Suite 1550
New Orleans, LA 70163
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS
BARBARA T. CASTEIX
BRUCE S. KINGSDORF
Attorneys at Law
701 Poydras Street
Suite 3650
New Orleans, LA 70139-3650
JOHN F. SHREVES
DONALD J. BRANNAN
DOUGLAS F. WYNNE
Attorneys at Law
1100 Poydras Street
30th
Floor, Energy Center
New Orleans, LA 70163
AFFIRMED
2. This appeal is from a summary judgment rendered in a concursus proceeding
against defendants, Zodiac Corporation, Ltd. ("Zodiac") and Salzer & Ramos
Enterprises, Ltd. ("Salzer & Ramos") (collectively, the "Zodiac Group"), finding
that a tax sale whereby the Zodiac Group's ancestor in title purportedly acquired
ownership of one ofthe parcels of immovable property involved in the concursus
proceeding was absolutely null, and thus denying the Zodiac Group's claims to a
portion ofthe funds deposited into the registry ofthe court as part ofthe concursus
proceeding. The Zodiac Group has also filed, in this Court, an exception of no
cause of action based on peremption. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial
court's grant of summary judgment and deny the exception.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In 2010, plaintiffs, Quantum Resources Management, L.L.C. ("Quantum")
and Milagro Producing, L.L.C. ("Milagro"), filed this concursus proceeding,
-2
3. alleging that they were the owners of several oil, gas, and mineral leases that
covered, among other properties, Lots 1-5 and Lots 35-38 in the Third Jefferson
Drainage District, in Sections 13 and 24, Township 16 South, Range 23 East, near
Lafitte, in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. Quantum asserted that it was the unit
operator ofthe CRIS 2 RA SU A Unit (the "Subject Unit"), which the
aforementioned lots contributed acreage to, and upon which were situated two
producing wells, known as the Mayronne No.1 Well and the Mayronne No.2
Well. (The property is apparently not subject to corporeal possession as it is under
water.) Desiring to pay the proper parties the proceeds of production from these
wells, Quantum and Milagro instituted this concursus proceeding, naming four
groups of defendants which Quantum and Milagro identified from the public
records as possibly having ownership interests in said lots that form part ofthe
Subject Unit. Named as defendants in addition to the Zodiac Group were Pirate
Lake Oil Corporation ("Pirate Lake'), George J. Mayronne, Jr., Agatha B.
Mayronne Haydel, the Succession of Oswald Harry Mayronne, and Huey J.
Mayronne (collectively, the "Mayronne Group"), and Joseph K. Handlin, II, Alan
Kent Jones, Jennifer Elizabeth Jones, Patrick Kent Lindsay Jones and Jacqueline
A. L. Jones (collectively, the "Handlin-Jones Group") (these two groups are also
collectively referred to herein as the "Mayronne and Handlin-Jones Groups").
The current appeal concerns only the ownership interests in and to Lot 4 in
the Third Jefferson Drainage District within the Subject Unit (the "subject Lot 4").
The Mayronne and Handlin-Jones Groups filed a motion for summary judgment,
arguing that the Zodiac Group had no right, title, or interest in and to the subject
Lot 4 because the Zodiac Group's claim oftitle stemmed from a 1926 tax sale that
was absolutely null, first because the tax assessment was in the name of a person
who never actually owned the subject Lot 4, and second because there was no
-3
4. evidence that the Sheriff gave notice ofthe tax sale to the record owner ofthe
subject Lot 4, violating the constitutional due process notice requirements
established by Mennonite Board ofMissions v. Adams, 462 U.S. 791, 103 S. Ct.
2706, 77 L. Ed. 2d 180 (1983). The Zodiac Group opposed the motion, arguing
that the attack on the 1926 tax sale to their predecessor in title was subject to the
five-year peremptive period set forth in the 1921 and 1974 Louisiana
Constitutions. The trial court ruled in favor ofthe movers, dismissing the Zodiac
Group's claims of ownership ofthe subject Lot 4, with prejudice.
On appeal, the Zodiac Group argues that the trial court erred in finding that
no issues ofmaterial fact remained, and in failing to find that the attack on the
1926 tax sale was perempted under the 1921 and 1974 Louisiana Constitutions,' as
per the Louisiana Supreme Court's holding in Gulotta v. Cutshaw, 283 So.2d 482
(La. 1973). The exception ofno cause of action filed by the Zodiac Group in this
Court asserts that the movers have no cause of action for the summary judgment
based on this same constitutional peremption.
The record and briefs in this case reflect that the Mayronne and Handlin-
Jones Groups' claim of ownership to the subject Lot 4 is based on a sale of
property from John S. Wells to George Mayronne dated August 8, 1938, recorded
in Jefferson Parish in COB 144, Page 7. Mr. Wells had acquired this property at a
tax sale on August 30, 1919 for 1918 unpaid taxes assessed in the name ofVirgil
Nobles. The affidavit of Larry E. Porterfield, the Mayronne and Handlin-Jones
Groups' professional land surveyor, indisputably established that the "Lot 4"
lLa. Const. art. VII, § 25 (C) (1974) provides as follows: Annulment. No sale of property for taxes shall
be set aside for any cause, except on proof of payment of the taxes prior to the date ofthe sale, unless the proceeding
to annul is instituted within six months after service of notice of sale. A notice of sale shall not be served until the
final day for redemption has ended. It must be served within five years after the date ofthe recordation ofthe tax
deed ifno notice is given. The fact that taxes were paid on a part ofthe property sold prior to the sale thereof, or
that a part ofthe property was not subject to taxation, shall not be cause for annulling the sale of any part thereof on
which the taxes for which it was sold were due and unpaid. No judgment annulling a tax sale shall have effect until
the price and all taxes and costs are paid, and until ten percent per annum interest on the amount ofthe price and
taxes paid from date ofrespective payments are paid to the purchaser; however, this shall not apply to sales annulled
because the taxes were paid prior to the date of sale.
-4
5. included in the sale from Mr. Wells to Mr. Mayronne is the subject Lot 4. Mr.
Mayronne's title in and to the subject Lot 4 later devolved to the Mayronne and
Handlin-Jones Groups.
On the other hand, the record and briefs in this case reflect that the Zodiac
Group's claim of ownership to the subject Lot 4 is based on a tax sale dated
August 22, 1925 whereby property identified as "Lot 4" assessed in the name of
Eric (Erie) T. White was conveyed to John A. Saxton for unpaid 1924 taxes
assessed in the name ofMr. White. Thereafter, on October 30,1931, Mr. Saxton
conveyed this "Lot 4" to Zodiac. On April 28, 1949, Zodiac conveyed an
undivided one-half interest in and to this "Lot 4" to Robert R. Ramos, whose
undivided one-half interest therein later devolved to Salzer & Ramos.
According to the affidavits ofthe Mayronne and Handlin-Jones Groups'
abstractor and surveyor, the public records ofJefferson Parish establish that
Louisiana Meadows Company had previously conveyed "Lot 4 ofBlock 8, the
town ofLafitte" to Mr. White. Although Mr. White had previously acquired
various properties in Jefferson Parish, none of these acquisitions included property
within the Subject Unit, and the "Lot 4" acquired by Mr. White from Louisiana
Meadows Company was not the subject Lot 4, but rather was "Lot 4 ofBlock 8,
the town of'Laffite". While the 1922 Jefferson Parish Tax Assessment Rolls
accurately described the property assessed to Mr. White as "Farm Lots 167-847
848-& 4 B 8 Barataria - 15 acres Fresh water A 100" (emphasis added), through an
apparent error in the description ofthat lot (4 B 8) in the 1924 tax assessment, the
Jefferson Parish Tax Assessment Rolls for 1924 described the property assessed to
Mr. White simply as "Farm Lots 167-847-848-& i Cont 15.45 acres Barataria - 15
acres Fresh water'A' 100" (emphasis added).
-5
6. The Zodiac Group acknowledges that Mr. White never owned the subject
Lot 4, and does not challenge the movers' assertion that notice of the 1926 tax sale
purporting to include the subject Lot 4 was never given to the record owner ofthe
subject Lot 4. However, the Zodiac Group argues that under Gulotta v. Cutshaw,
the lack of notice to the record owner made the 1926 tax sale a relative nullity that
was cured by the five-year peremptive period found in the 1921 and 1974
Louisiana Constitutions. The Zodiac Group further argues that genuine issues of
material fact remain as to whether the Sheriff, in 1926, employed "reasonable
steps" to give notice of the pending tax sale to the record owner.
The movers argued, however, that Mennonite, supra, at 798, effectively
overruled Gulotta, at least regarding tax sales with the constitutional deficiency of
lack of notice to the record owner ofthe property subject to the tax sale.
Mennonite held that a tax sale without notice to a person with a "legally protected
property interest" in the property is a violation ofthe Due Process Clause ofthe
14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, thereby rendering such a sale
an absolute nullity.
In Gulotta, which was handed down in 1973, the Louisiana Supreme Court
found a tax sale valid pursuant to an assessment in the name of a person not the
owner ofthe property since a suit challenging the validity ofthe tax sale had not
been brought within the five-year peremptive period provided by the Louisiana
Constitution. Gulotta, 283 So.2d at 492. Finding that none ofthe three exceptions
to the running of the peremptive period-I) payment oftaxes prior to sale; 2) the
tax debtor remaining in corporeal possession of the property; and 3) lack of
sufficient description ofthe property in the assessment-were present, the court
concluded that the seller's non-ownership ofthe property did not warrant the tax
sale being set aside. Id.
-6
7. ANALYSIS
Summary judgments are reviewed on appeal de novo, with the appellate
court using the same criteria that govern the trial court's determination of whether
summary judgment is appropriate. Smith v. Our Lady ofthe Lake Hospital, Inc.,
93-2512 (La. 7/5/94),639 So.2d 730, 750. The summary judgment procedure is
designed to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action.
The procedure is favored and shall be construed to accomplish these ends.
A motion for summary judgment should be granted only if the pleadings,
depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with
affidavits, show that there is no genuine issue ofmaterial fact and that the mover is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. LSA-e.C.P. art. 966(B). The initial
burden of proof is with the mover to show that no genuine issue ofmaterial fact
exists. If the moving party will not bear the burden of proof at trial, the moving
party must only point out that there is an absence of factual support for one or
more elements essential to the adverse party's claim, action, or defense. The non
moving party must then produce factual support sufficient to establish that he will
be able to satisfy his evidentiary burden of proof at trial. If the non-moving party
fails to do so, there is no genuine issue ofmaterial fact and summary judgment
should be granted. LSA-C.C.P. art. 966(C)(2); Callis v. Jefferson Parish Hosp.
Service, Dist. # 1, 07-580, pp. 4-5 (La. App. 5 Cir. 12/27/07), 975 So.2d 641, 643.
Whether a particular fact is material can be seen only in light ofthe substantive law
applicable to the case. Hubbard v. Jefferson Parish Parks and Recreation, 10-24
(La. App. 5 Cir. 5/25/10), 40 So.3d 1106, 1110.
When a tax sale ofreal property does not meet the constitutional and
jurisprudential criteria, including ifthe debtor's due process rights were violated
-7
8. because of lack of adequate notice as per Mennonite, the peremptive period of La.
Constitution Article VII, § 25 (C) does not run. The tax sale is an absolute nullity
that may be attacked collaterally at any time, and is not cured by the
constitutionally peremptive period. Bank One Louisiana, N.A. v. Gray, 34,802 (La.
App. 2 Cir. 6/20/01), 792 So.2d 29. Notably, in State Through Dept. ofTransp. &
Dev. v. Knight, 93-767 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2/2/94), 631 So.2d 714, the Second Circuit
noted that it had been generally held, when Gulotta v. Cutshaw was written (upon
which the Zodiac Group relies and which was handed down prior to Mennonite),
that lack of notice of a tax sale to the record owner made the tax sale a relative
nullity that was cured by the three- and five-year peremptive periods provided by
the Louisiana Constitution. However, the Knight court acknowledged that
Mennonite's elevation ofthe notice requirement to a due process violation renders
a tax sale with this deficiency an absolute nullity, effectively overruling this part of
Gulotta's holding relative to this sort of deficiency, the Zodiac Group's reliance
notwithstanding. Thus, because the movers herein may attack the 1926 tax sale as
an absolute nullity, the Zodiac Group's exception ofno cause of action is hereby
denied.
In its brief, the Zodiac Group lists fourteen "Specifications ofErrors and
Issues Presented: Facts."? Some ofthese are specifications of error are asserted as
2 The Zodiac Group's specifications oferror and issues presented for review are as follows:
1. The District Court ignored the undisputed facts which support the application ofArticle 10
Section 11 and the Gulotta case in this concursus.
2. The District Court ignored the fact that Erie White was the assessed owner ofLot 4, 3rd Jefferson
Drainage District on the tax rolls for the years immediately prior to the tax sale.
3. The District Court ignored the fact that White was the only assessed owned of Lot 4 at the time of
the tax sale in 1926.
4. The District Court ignored the undisputed fact that the White/Saxton tax sale was not attacked
until the filing of this concursus suit, many, many years after the 1926 tax sale.
5. The District Court ignored the undisputed fact that Lot 4 was correctly described in the Erie White
assessment.
6. The District Court ignored the undisputed fact that the 1925 taxes were not paid by anyone prior to
the 1926 sale to John Saxton.
7. The District Court ignored the undisputed fact that there is no corporeal possession of Lot 4
because it is in the Pen behind Lafitte and is underwater.
8. The District Court ignored the undisputed fact that the other chains oftitle have conflicting and
confusing tax sales from Wisner Estates to different purchasers within a period ofthree years.
-8
9. uncontested facts (Nos. 1 through 11), and some relate to the burdens of proof
(Nos. 12-14). Finding as we do that the 1926 tax sale was an absolute nullity as
per Mennonite, and that Gulotta's holding (and the constitutional peremptive
period of five years) is now limited to attacks upon tax sales that are relative
nullities, it is unnecessary for us to address each of the Zodiac Group's
specifications of error individually, as the "facts" listed therein, uncontested or
contested, are not relevant to our analysis in light of the uncontested facts that Mr.
White was neither the record owner nor the actual owner ofthe subject Lot 4, and
importantly, that the record owner ofthe subject Lot 4 did not receive notice of the
pending tax sale.
The Zodiac Group argued in brief and at oral argument to this Court that
neither their opponents nor the court below addressed the "reasonable step"
doctrine, noted by the United States Supreme Court in Jones v. Flowers, 3
which the
Zodiac Group argues excused the Sheriff in 1926 from ascertaining the identity of
the record owner of the subject Lot 4, or at least excused the Sheriff from doing
anything more than providing notice of the tax sale to Mr. White, the assessed
owner of the subject Lot 4.
The Jones case held that when notice of a tax sale is mailed to the owner and
is returned undelivered, the government must take additional reasonable steps to
provide notice to the owner before taking the owner's property, ifit is practicable.
9. The District Court ignored the fact that the Sheriff complied with all Mennonite/Mullane
requirements in the White/Saxton tax sale.
10. The District Court ignored the fact that Lot 4 was correctly described in the White assessment and
the White/Saxton tax sale.
II. The District Court ignored the fact that the White/Saxton sale was not attacked for many years
after the constitutional five-year preemption had passed.
12. The District Court ignored all ofthe facts and problems in the other chains oftitle arising from the
multiple tax sales and conveyances from the same seller in a very short period oftime which bring this case
within the scope ofthe "reasonable step" rule.
13. The District Court ignored the facts which show that none ofthe three limited exceptions to the
five-year constitutional preemption on tax sales apply in this case.
14. The District Court ignored the well known rule that the burden ofproofshifts to the party
attacking the title ifpleading attacking the title is perempted on its face.
3547 U.S. 220, 126 S.Ct. 1708, 164 L.Ed.2d 415 (2006).
-9
10. The Court held that due process does not require that the property owner receive
actual notice before the government may take his property; rather, due process
requires only that the government provide notice "reasonably calculated" under all
the circumstances to apprise interested parties ofthe pendency ofthe action and
afford them an opportunity to present their objections. While declining to
prescribe a particular form ofnotice, the Court found that mailing two letters to the
owner that were returned unclaimed, plus publishing the notice ofthe tax sale in
the newspaper two years after the initial notice was returned unclaimed, were
inadequate to comply with the State's constitutional due process requirements.
The Zodiac Group argues that in accordance with Jones, the actions taken by
the Sheriff, in 1926, should be considered to have been fair and reasonable to all
concerned parties under the particular facts and circumstances involved in this
case, particularly in light ofalleged complications involved in the title to the
subject Lot 4. In other words, the Zodiac Group maintains that it would have been
impracticable for the Sheriff, in 1926, to have been required to take any additional
steps in attempting to ascertain and give notice ofthe pending tax sale to the record
owner of the subject Lot 4, and thus only giving notice ofthe pending tax sale to
the assessed owner ofthe subject Lot 4 should be considered sufficient and
reasonable under the particular facts and circumstances involved in this case.
With all due respect to the Zodiac Group's arguments, we find that Jones is
distinguishable from this case. In Jones, the State did send a notice ofthe pending
tax sale to the record owner ofthe property in question that was returned
undeliverable and therefore was known by the State to be ineffective. Inadequate
further steps were then taken by the State to provide notice ofthe pending tax sale
to the record owner. In this case, however, the record owner ofthe subject Lot 4
was not in any way notified ofthe pending tax sale. Jones presupposes that the
-10
11. State will at least attempt to ascertain and notify the record owner ofthe property
ofthe pending tax sale. Because the notice was returned undeliverable in Jones,
the State was made aware that the notice was ineffective and should have taken
additional "reasonable steps" to provide notice ofthe pending tax sale to the record
owner. In our view, Jones does not excuse the Sheriff from at least taking
"reasonable steps" to ascertain and attempt to give notice of the pending tax sale to
the record owner ofthe subject property. In this case, notice ofthe tax sale was
only sent, if at all, to a person (Mr. White) who was not the record owner of the
subject property. In other words, in this case, no notice, reasonably calculated or
otherwise, ofthe pending tax sale was provided to the record owner ofthe subject
Lot 4. Accordingly, the Zodiac Group's reliance on Jones is misplaced and
without merit.
CONCLUSION
Based on our de novo review ofthis matter, and after carefully considering
the law applicable to this case, for the reasons set forth herein, we find that no
genuine issues of material fact remain in this case, and accordingly, affirm the trial
court's grant of summary judgment dismissing the claims ofthe Zodiac Group in
this concursus proceeding, and further deny the Zodiac Group's exception of no
cause of action based on peremption filed in this Court.
AFFIRMED
-11
12. MARION F. EDWARDS
CHIEF JUDGE
SUSAN M. CHEHARDY
CLARENCE E. McMANUS
WALTER J. ROTHSCHILD
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
ROBERT A. CHAISSON
JUDGES
FIFTH CIRCUIT
101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053)
POST OFFICE BOX 489
GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054
www.fifthcircuit.org
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT AND
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
PETERJ. FITZGERALD, JR.
CLERK OF COURT
GENEVIEVE L. VERRETTE
CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
MARY E. LEGNON
FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
TROY A. BROUSSARD
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF
(504) 376-1400
(504) 376-1498 FAX
I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE OPINION IN THE BELOW-NUMBERED MATTER HAS BEEN
MAILED ON OR DELNERED THIS DAY MAY 31. 2012 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, COUNSEL OF RECORD
AND ALL PARTIES NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:
ll-CA-813
TOMMY D. OVERTON, JR.
ATTORNEY AT LAW
404 KNOX STREET
HOUSTON, TX 77007
GREGORY A. MILLER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P. O. BOX 190
9 APPLE STREET
NORCO, LA 70079
SIDNEY 1. SHUSHAN
JONATHAN M. SHUSHAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1100 POYDRAS STREET
ENERGY CENTRE, SUITE 1440
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70163
BARBARA T. CASTEIX
BRUCE S. KINGSDORF
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
701 POYDRAS STREET
SUITE 3650
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70139
ADRIAN F. LAPEYRONNIE, III
ATTORNEY AT LAW
848 SECOND STREET
SUITE 200
GRETNA, LA 70053
DONALD 1. BRANNAN
JOHN F. SHREVES
DOUGLAS F. WYNNE
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1100 POYDRAS STREET
ENERGY CENTRE, 30TH FLOOR
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70163
CHRIS M. TREPAGNIER
KENNETH V. WARD, JR.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
331 GIROD STREET
MANDEVILLE, LA 70448
JEFFERY D. LIEBERMAN
JAMIE D. RHYMES
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
822 HARDING STREET
P.O. BOX 52008
LAFAYETTE, LA 70505