Palomeque v. Prudhomme
1995 WL 698046, 664 So. 2d 88 (1995)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To acquire an apparent predial servitude by ten-year acquisitive prescription under Louisiana law, the claimant must possess the right with peaceable possession, good faith, and a 'just title,' which must be a written instrument specific enough to establish the servitude, not merely boilerplate language.
Facts:
- The properties at 420 and 422 Chartres Street in New Orleans, owned by Paul R. Prudhomme and Dr. F.E. Palomeque respectively, share a common wall.
- In 1974, the building at 422 Chartres was converted into condominiums, and during this project, windows were installed in the common wall without the consent of the owner of 420 Chartres.
- In 1981, Paul Prudhomme purchased the property at 420 Chartres.
- Dr. Palomeque subsequently purchased condominium units at 422 Chartres, with deeds containing standard language conveying the property 'together with all the rights, ways, privileges, servitudes and appurtenances thereunto belonging.'
- Prudhomme sought to build a second-story addition to his property, which would require bricking over the windows in the common wall.
- Dr. Palomeque claimed his property had acquired a servitude of light and view through the windows via more than ten years of use, and he sought to prohibit Prudhomme from obstructing them.
Procedural Posture:
- Dr. F.E. Palomeque filed a petition for injunctive relief against Paul R. Prudhomme in the trial court.
- The trial court granted a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction.
- Following a trial on the merits, the trial court denied the permanent injunction, holding that servitudes of light and view cannot be acquired by acquisitive prescription.
- Dr. Palomeque, as appellant, appealed to the court of appeal.
- The court of appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment but on the alternative ground that Dr. Palomeque lacked the requisite good faith.
- The Supreme Court of Louisiana granted certiorari upon application by Dr. Palomeque to review the decision.
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 general, boilerplate language in an act of sale conveying property 'together with all the rights, ways, privileges, servitudes and appurtenances' constitute the 'just title' required to acquire an apparent servitude of light and view by ten-year acquisitive prescription?
Opinions:
Majority - Marcus, Justice
No. General boilerplate language in a deed is insufficient to constitute the 'just title' required for ten-year acquisitive prescription of a servitude. The court first established that servitudes of light and view in a common wall are 'apparent servitudes' and thus may be acquired by acquisitive prescription. However, under the controlling Louisiana Civil Code article 742, ten-year prescription requires peaceable possession, good faith, and just title. Just title, under article 3483, must be a written instrument that would have been sufficient to create the servitude if it had been granted by the owner of the servient estate. The court reasoned that servitudes are disfavored by law and must be created by an express and specific instrument. The ambiguous, boilerplate language in Dr. Palomeque's deeds would be insufficient to establish a servitude by title and therefore cannot suffice as just title for purposes of acquisitive prescription. Because Dr. Palomeque lacked the requisite just title, his claim for a servitude based on ten-year prescription fails.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the stringent requirements for acquiring servitudes by ten-year acquisitive prescription in Louisiana following the 1977 Civil Code revisions. It establishes that 'just title' is a distinct and substantive requirement, not merely evidence of good faith, and must meet the same standard of specificity as an instrument creating a servitude by title. The ruling prevents claims of servitudes based on vague, standard deed language, thereby protecting landowners from implied burdens on their property. This reinforces the legal principle that restraints on property use are disfavored and any doubt regarding a servitude's existence must be resolved in favor of the unencumbered servient estate.
