225 So. 3d 1104
La. Ct. App.2017Background
- In 1950 the Hackneys conveyed “all of the timber and trees being, standing, lying, growing and to grow” on specified tracts to Hillyer Deutsch Edwards, Inc. (HDE) for $55,000 and a 50‑year right to grow/cut/remove timber; a 1956 amendment extended the term to 99 years for $2,000 and additional obligations.
- The deed expressly defined “timber and trees” to include timber then existing and timber “to grow” during the contract term, and granted broad surface and access rights (ingress/egress, roads, sawmills, houses, etc.).
- HDE’s interests were later transferred; successors (Martin, Louisiana Hardwood, Louisiana Forestlands, NMTC) obtained timber‑rights agreements with staggered terms and asserted successor rights under the Hackney Deed.
- M/V Resources, owner of one tract formerly in the Hackney conveyance, sued for declaratory relief and injunctive relief, arguing the Hackney Deed was only a sale of standing timber existing in 1950 (a separate timber estate) and that any removal term expired when that timber was removed.
- Defendants counterclaimed that the agreement was a lease (a sale coupled with a lease) granting rights to grow, cultivate, and harvest timber for 99 years; they sought a declaration of their continuing rights and injunctive relief against M/V.
- The trial court granted cross motions for partial summary judgment to defendants, declaring the instrument a sale of existing timber coupled with a 99‑year lease to grow/harvest timber and confirming successors’ rights; the court denied M/V’s request to amend to assert a usufruct theory. This court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Characterization of the 1950 deed (and 1956 extension): sale of existing timber only vs. sale coupled with lease | The deed conveyed only the timber existing on 12/22/1950 (a separate timber estate) with a finite removal term; rights to future growth were not conveyed | The deed both sold existing timber and leased the land to permit HDE and successors to cultivate, grow, and harvest timber for the extended 99‑year term, including broad surface rights | The court held the instrument is a sale of existing timber coupled with a 99‑year lease to grow/cultivate/harvest timber; successors possess HDE’s rights |
| Right to enter and develop land for timber operations | M/V: rights were limited to removing in‑existence timber; no ongoing surface/operational rights beyond removal | Defs: deed granted ingress/egress and rights to build roads, mills, houses, and to cultivate/grow timber during the term | Court: language granting ingress/egress and construction rights supports lease‑type rights; these rights survive and are part of the 99‑year arrangement |
| Usufruct alternative pleaded by M/V (requested amendment) | M/V: if not a separate timber estate, deed created a usufruct that expired in 1980 | Defs: issue was raised and considered; the deed’s terms were inconsistent with a standalone usufruct; lease characterization controls | Court: denied leave to amend; found no abuse of discretion because the court already addressed and rejected usufruct theory as moot given sale+lease finding |
| Summary judgment standard / admissible evidence scope | M/V: summary judgment should favor its declaratory theory | Defs: their motions showed absence of material fact and entitlement to judgment as a matter of law | Court: de novo review affirmed trial court’s partial summary judgment for defendants; evidence admitted on motions supported sale+lease characterization |
Key Cases Cited
- Cooley v. Meridian Lumber Co., 197 So. 255 (La. 1940) (distinguishable: deed there conveyed only existing timber without future‑growth or broad operational rights)
- Taylor v. Southland Lumber Co., 110 So. 746 (La. 1926) (distinguishable on similar grounds to Cooley)
- NAB Natural Resources, LLC v. Willamette Indus., Inc., 679 So.2d 477 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1996) (contract interpretation from four corners may be a question of law)
- Martin Timber Co. v. Pegues, 715 So.2d 728 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1998) (rights in a timber instrument may extend beyond mere accessorial rights of a vendee)
- IP Timberlands Operating Co. v. Denmiss Corp., 657 So.2d 282 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1995) (discussion of usufruct analysis in timber contexts)
- Stockstill v. C.F. Industries, Inc., 665 So.2d 802 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1995) (standard for denial of leave to amend pleadings)