129 So. 3d 798
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- Regua purchased a severely flood-damaged duplex in St. Bernard Parish in April 2006 under a bond-for-deed for $40,000: $5,000 down and 96 monthly installments; property sold "as is" and buyer to pay ad valorem taxes.
- The bond-for-deed contained statutory default/ cancellation language and additional contract language allowing seller to retake possession upon termination.
- Regua fell behind on payments in 2009; Sauciers notified her of default, recorded an affidavit of cancellation on September 29, 2009, changed the locks, and prevented her reentry.
- Regua sued for wrongful eviction, conversion, breach of contract, fraud, reimbursement for improvements, and injunctive relief; Sauciers denied wrongdoing.
- After a bench trial (no transcript), the trial court awarded Regua $86,203.36 (refund of down payment and monthly payments, taxes, and renovation costs) but denied conversion and wrongful eviction claims for lack of proof.
- The court noted it could reopen for fair rental value and attorney fees; neither party pursued those issues before appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether seller may retain all payments after cancelling bond for deed for buyer's nonpayment | Regua: Seller may not keep all payments; she is entitled to return of payments, taxes, and renovation costs | Sauciers: They complied with cancellation procedure; argue trial court relied too heavily on precedent and seller should retain payments per contract | Court: Seller may not retain all payments; awarded Regua refund of payments, taxes, and renovation costs as equitable remedy |
| Applicability of additional contract termination provisions beyond nonpayment | Regua: Contract must be interpreted with statutory protections limiting seller’s remedies | Sauciers: Parties may contract additional bases for termination and possession | Court: Additional contract terms do not permit retention of all payments; equitable adjustments required per bond-for-deed law and precedent |
| Measure of vendor’s recovery after failed bond-for-deed | Regua: Should recover payments, taxes, and costs of improvements absent evidence of rental/occupancy value | Sauciers: Vendor entitled to keep payments or other recovery under contract | Court: Recovery limited; vendor only entitled to fair rental value while purchaser occupied the premises; here trial court awarded full reimbursements because no evidence of occupancy or lesser enhancement value |
| Damages for improvements and effect on award | Regua: Entitled to reimbursement for renovation costs which increased property value | Sauciers: Did not dispute that improvements increased value but implicitly argued against full reimbursement | Court: Trial record showed receipts and no evidence that enhanced value was less than reconstruction costs; awarded renovation costs to Regua |
Key Cases Cited
- Berthelot v. Le Inv. LLC, 866 So.2d 877 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2004) (vendor under bond-for-deed cannot simply retain all payments; remedy limited by equitable adjustments such as fair rental value)
- Scott v. Apgar, 113 So.2d 457 (La. 1959) (limitations on vendor’s retention of purchaser payments under failed contract)
- Montz v. Theard, 818 So.2d 181 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2002) (bond-for-deed principles limiting vendor recovery affirmed)
- Gray v. James, 503 So.2d 598 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1987) (vendor’s recovery after bond-for-deed termination constrained by equitable considerations)