Deselle v. Bonnette
251 So. 2d 68 (1971)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 3653, a plaintiff in a petitory action against a defendant in possession must prove a valid title to the property in dispute. The plaintiff must recover on the strength of their own title, not on the weakness of the defendant's title.
Facts:
- Prior to 1911, Alcide A. Chatelain owned a 48-arpent tract of land which encompassed all properties involved in the dispute, with an old highway running through it.
- In 1911, Chatelain sold approximately 12 acres of land lying 'on the east side of the public road' to Marius Deselle, plaintiff's ancestor in title.
- In 1916, Chatelain sold the remaining 36 acres lying west of the old highway to Isaac Gauthier, defendant's ancestor in title.
- Around 1920, the old highway was abandoned and a new, parallel highway was constructed approximately 65 feet to its west.
- This relocation created a narrow strip of land between the boundary of the old highway and the boundary of the new highway, which is the subject of the dispute.
- The plaintiff, James J. Deselle, acquired his property through subsequent conveyances from Marius Deselle, which maintained the 'east of the public road' description.
- The defendant, Paul Dowdy Bonnette, is in physical possession of the disputed strip of land.
Procedural Posture:
- James J. Deselle initially filed a 'Possessory Action' against Paul Dowdy Bonnette in a Louisiana district court.
- Following an exception by Bonnette, the trial court sustained the exception, and Deselle filed a supplemental petition reframing the case as a 'Petitory Action'.
- The trial court judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Deselle, finding that he had a 'better title' than the defendant.
- The defendant, Paul Dowdy Bonnette, as appellant, appealed the 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:
In a petitory action where the defendant is in possession of the disputed property, does the plaintiff meet their burden of proof by establishing a better title than the defendant, or must the plaintiff prove their own valid and perfect title?
Opinions:
Majority - Culpepper, Judge
No. In a petitory action against a defendant in possession, the plaintiff must make out their own valid title and cannot prevail merely by showing a better title than the defendant. The court reasoned that the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, specifically Article 3653, legislatively overruled prior jurisprudence that had created an exception to this rule. Article 3653 establishes a clear, two-part test based on possession: if the defendant is in possession, the plaintiff must prove a valid title (Art. 3653(1)); if the defendant is not in possession, the plaintiff need only prove a better title (Art. 3653(2)). The court found that because defendant Bonnette was admittedly in possession, plaintiff Deselle had the burden to 'make out his title.' Deselle's chain of title only gave him land east of the old highway, and therefore did not include the disputed strip located west of the old highway's path. Because Deselle failed to prove his own valid title, the defendant's title was not at issue, and Deselle's claim must fail.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the burden of proof in Louisiana petitory actions following the adoption of the 1960 Code of Civil Procedure. It firmly establishes that the defendant's possession is the sole determinant of the plaintiff's evidentiary burden. By explicitly rejecting prior jurisprudential exceptions that considered the quality of a possessor's title, the court created a bright-line rule that simplifies real actions. This precedent solidifies the principle that a possessor of property has a strong legal position, requiring a claimant to prove their own perfect ownership rather than merely attacking the possessor's potentially flawed title.
