Magnolia Island Plantation L L C v. Lucky Family L L C
5:18-cv-01526
W.D. La.Nov 13, 2024Background
- Ronald Lollar executed a $1.73 million promissory note in favor of Barbara Lollar, secured by Louisiana property, and later transferred to Magnolia Island Plantation LLC, which assumed liability.
- Based on a reversed 2008 state court judgment ("Lucky I"), defendant W.A. Lucky III sought and achieved a Sheriff's sale of the Note and underlying property in 2018, allegedly using procedural maneuvers including filing notices and litigation (“Lucky II”).
- The Sheriff’s appraisal process dramatically undervalued the Note, culminating in its sale to Lucky Family LLC (linked to Mr. Lucky) for only about 6% of its face value amid claims of manipulated appraisals and lack of impartial third appraiser appointment.
- Plaintiffs allege statutory violations, abuse of process, due process deprivations, and unjust enrichment, seeking annulment of the sale and damages.
- Defendants argued that procedural errors in appraisal did not provide grounds to annul the Sheriff's sale under Louisiana law and sought summary judgment; plaintiffs moved for summary judgment based on new deposition evidence from Deputy Flournoy.
- All three cross-motions for partial summary judgment were denied due to remaining genuine disputes of material fact, reserving core issues for trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the third appraiser for the Note properly appointed per La. R.S. § 13:4365? | Sheriff’s Office failed to comply; Lacour not formally appointed as required | Appointment was sufficient or immaterial; disputed facts do not create remedy | Denied – Fact issue remains for trial |
| Is annulment of the Sheriff’s sale a proper remedy if appraisal process was improper? | Annulment is available for improper or absent appraisal; defects invalidate sale | Annulment not available; only technical flaw present | Denied – Issue remains for trial |
| Does Louisiana law permit an action to annul sale under these circumstances? | Cites precedent recognizing annulment actions for improper sale/appraisal | Precedent not directly applicable; law does not support annulment here | Denied – Issue remains for trial |
| Are claims for damages for improper sale/appraisal actionable? | Yes; improper process caused damages and unjust enrichment | No; process and remedy were lawful | Denied – Issue remains for trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
- Citizens Bank of Ville Platte v. Am. Druggists Ins. Co., 471 So. 2d 1119 (La. App. 3d Cir. 1985) (appointing active duties on sheriff)
- Tucker v. New Orleans Laundries, Inc., 145 So. 2d 365 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1962) (annulment permitted for improper or absent appraisal)
- Bauman v. Fields, 332 So. 2d 885 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1976) (court considered annulment of sheriff's sale)
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Blackwell, 295 So. 2d 522 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1974) (violation of appraisal statute as grounds to annul sale)