Bond v. Green
1981 La. App. LEXIS 4240, 401 So.2d 639 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A usufruct established over both land and the structures upon it is not terminated by the total loss of the structures due to age or decay; because the loss is only partial, the usufruct continues on the remaining land.
Facts:
- In 1966, George and Mildred Green sold a 55-acre tract of land to Lloyd Love.
- In the act of sale, the Greens reserved a usufruct for themselves over the house they resided in, a smaller adjacent house, and the surrounding yards.
- At the time of the 1966 sale, both houses were already in a dilapidated and badly deteriorated condition.
- The Greens continued to live in the larger house and attempted repairs, but the structures' conditions worsened over time due to age and termites.
- Around 1976, believing the structures were unsafe and might collapse, Mrs. Green had them demolished and removed with the permission of the landowner, Love.
- The Greens then placed two mobile homes on the property in approximately the same locations as the former houses.
- James and Ann Bond subsequently purchased the larger tract of land in 1980.
Procedural Posture:
- James and Ann Bond filed a rule to evict George and Mildred Green and J.B. and Freddie Powell in a Louisiana trial court.
- The trial court rendered judgment in favor of the Greens, recognizing their usufruct over four specific lots and ordering them to reimburse the Bonds for taxes.
- The Bonds, as plaintiffs, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a usufruct established over houses and the surrounding yards terminate under Louisiana law when the houses are removed after becoming uninhabitable due to natural decay?
Opinions:
Majority - Cutrer, Judge.
No, the usufruct does not terminate. A usufruct over nonconsumable property only terminates upon the permanent and total loss of the property subject to it. Here, the usufruct was granted not only on the two houses but also on the yards surrounding them. The destruction of the houses due to decay constitutes only a partial, not a total, loss of the property subject to the usufruct. Under LSA-C.C. art. 614, if a loss is only partial, the usufruct continues and is exercised on whatever remains of the thing. The court also rejected the plaintiffs' arguments that the Greens committed waste or that failure to pay property taxes terminated the usufruct, holding that a usufructuary is not obligated to restore property destroyed by age and that the proper remedy for non-payment of taxes is reimbursement, not termination.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the 'total loss' requirement for the termination of a usufruct under Louisiana Civil Code article 613. It establishes that when a usufruct encumbers both land and structures, the natural destruction of the structures does not extinguish the usufructuary's rights in the underlying land. This provides significant protection for usufructuaries, preventing naked owners from reclaiming full ownership simply because structures on the property have deteriorated with age. The case also reinforces that the naked owner's remedy for a usufructuary's failure to pay property taxes is a personal action for reimbursement, not the termination of the real right.
