Tullier v. Tullier
464 So.2d 278 (1985)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A new law that replaces a judicially created conclusive presumption with a rebuttable presumption is procedural, not substantive, and may be applied retroactively because it does not divest vested property rights.
Facts:
- Brenda Tullier and Benjamin Tullier, Jr. were married.
- Benjamin's mother, Pearl Tullier, owned three tracts of land as her separate property.
- To facilitate a compromise regarding his father's succession, Benjamin Tullier, Jr. paid $15,000 using his separate property, which consisted of savings bonds acknowledged by his mother to be solely his.
- In exchange for the value of the bonds, Pearl Tullier transferred the three tracts of land to Benjamin via deeds titled 'cash sales' for a recited price of $14,899.
- No money was actually exchanged during the transfer from Pearl Tullier to her son Benjamin.
- The deeds transferring the property to Benjamin during his marriage did not contain a 'double declaration' stating the property was acquired with his separate funds for his separate estate.
Procedural Posture:
- Brenda Marie Tullier filed suit in trial court against her ex-husband, Benjamin J. Tullier, Jr., to partition their former community property.
- The trial court found that the three tracts of land in question were community property.
- Benjamin Tullier, Jr., as appellant, appealed the trial court's decision to the Court of Appeal.
- The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court, holding that the land was the separate property of Benjamin Tullier, Jr.
- The Supreme Court of Louisiana granted a writ of certiorari at the request of Brenda Tullier, the applicant, to review the appellate court's 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 Louisiana Civil Code Article 2340, which eliminated the judicially created 'double declaration' requirement and established a rebuttable presumption of community property, apply retroactively to classify property acquired by a husband before the article's effective date?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Blanche
Yes, Louisiana Civil Code Article 2340 applies retroactively. The former 'double declaration rule' was a jurisprudentially created conclusive presumption, not a rule of substantive law, and therefore could not create a vested substantive right of ownership in property. Because Article 2340 creates a rebuttable presumption, it is a procedural or remedial law. Procedural laws can be given retroactive effect unless they impair vested rights, and since the double declaration rule did not create a vested right, there is no bar to retroactively applying Article 2340. Applying this article allows the court to determine the true nature of the property based on evidence, which is a better policy than relying on a rigid, judicially-fashioned presumption. Under this standard, Benjamin Tullier successfully proved with evidence that the property was acquired with his separate assets (the bonds) and is therefore his separate property.
Analysis:
This case is significant for clarifying the distinction between substantive and procedural laws in the context of Louisiana's matrimonial regimes. By classifying the long-standing, judicially created 'double declaration rule' as procedural, the court allowed for the retroactive application of its legislative repeal, impacting countless property transactions that occurred before 1980. This decision prioritizes substance over form, allowing courts to look beyond the face of a deed to determine the true separate or community nature of property based on factual evidence. It signals a shift away from rigid, formalistic requirements in property classification toward a more equitable, evidence-based approach.
