170 So. 3d 259
La. Ct. App.2015Background
- Dispute over title to Lot 4 (1918 plat) between Zodiac Group (claiming via a 1925 sheriff’s tax sale) and Mayronne Group (claiming via a 1936 redemption tracing to a 1920 adjudication to the State).
- Certified parish records introduced by both sides; neither party had additional evidence beyond the record.
- Earlier appellate ruling affirmed summary judgment for Mayronne based on lack of constitutional notice (Mennonite), but Louisiana Supreme Court held Mennonite not retroactive and treated lack of notice as a relative nullity under Gulotta.
- Supreme Court remanded because of factual gaps (a 1936 certificate showing a 1930 typo) and possible acquisitive prescription; parties later submitted an Act of Correction (fixing 1936 certificate to show 1920) and a quitclaim from a co-defendant.
- Trial court granted Mayronne’s renewed motion, finding Lot 4 had been adjudicated to the State in 1920 and the 1925 tax sale was therefore an absolute nullity; Zodiac appealed.
- On de novo review the appellate court affirmed: no genuine issue of material fact remained and Waterman-type rule (sale of State-owned property is void) controlled, so 1925 sale is absolutely null.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mayronne) | Defendant's Argument (Zodiac) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of 1925 tax sale given prior adjudication to State | Sale is void because property was adjudicated to State in 1920; taxing officers lacked power to sell | Five-year constitutional peremption bars collateral attack on 1925 sale; only specified exceptions apply | Sale is an absolute nullity because property belonged to State at time of sale; peremption does not run against State while property is in State ownership |
| Effect of Act of Correction and quitclaim on factual gaps | Act of Correction fixes the 1936 certificate typographical error (1920 not 1930); quitclaim removes other claimants | Evidence insufficient; prior Supreme Court concerns about gaps and possible acquisitive prescription persist | Act of Correction and quitclaim cure the prior gaps; parties disclaim acquisitive prescription; no factual dispute remains |
| Retroactivity of Mennonite due-process notice rule | (Mayronne did not rely on Mennonite) | Zodiac previously relied on lack-of-notice rulings (Gulotta/Mennonite) to defend sale | Louisiana Supreme Court already held Mennonite not retroactive; lack of notice is a relative nullity under Gulotta — but decision here turns on State-adjudication absolute-nullity, not notice |
| Whether peremption/prescription runs against the State to bar attacks | Attack not time-barred because peremption does not run while State retains title | Article X §11 peremption should bar attacks after five years regardless; State subject to peremption by implication | Constitution bars prescription against State unless expressly provided; peremption under Art. X §11 does not run against State while State holds title, so attack may proceed |
Key Cases Cited
- Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams, 462 U.S. 791 (U.S. 1983) (due-process notice required for tax-sale to bind record owner)
- Gulotta v. Cutshaw, 283 So.2d 482 (La. 1973) (lack of notice is a relative nullity under Louisiana law)
- Waterman v. Tidewater Assoc. Oil Co., 35 So.2d 225 (La. 1947) (tax sale of property previously adjudicated to State and not properly redeemed is absolutely void)
- Thomas v. Bomer-Blanks Lumber Co., 105 So.2d 299 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1958) (applies Waterman to set aside later tax sale of State-owned property)
- Quantum Res. Mgmt., L.L.C. v. Pirate Lake Oil Corp., 112 So.3d 209 (La. 2013) (state Supreme Court remand: Mennonite not retroactive; identified factual gaps concerning Lot 4)
- Smitko v. Gulf S. Shrimp, Inc., 94 So.3d 750 (La. 2012) (standard for de novo appellate review of summary judgment)