Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana; May 18, 1987; Louisiana; State Supreme Court
A legal dispute regarding boundary determination exists between contiguous land tracts in Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana. The central issue is whether the side lines of land sold from a trapezoidal waterfront tract must follow the parent tract's contours when the deed does not specify this, raising the question of whether side lines are to be treated as angled or parallel.
Both parties trace their titles to Gatien Decuir. Joseph Decuir initially owned Section 49 on False River, dividing it into two halves with each half having a 10 arpent frontage. The northeastern half was further divided into quarters, one of which was sold to Gatien Decuir in 1874. The plaintiffs' title derives from a sale by Gatien Decuir to Leonce Decuir in 1882, describing a tract with unclear side boundary specifications. Conversely, the defendants' title comes from a sale to Alma Decuir and Ervin Decuir in 1888, which explicitly states converging side lines.
The trial court ruled that the Hurst tract should have converging lines to align with the Ricard tract, asserting that the original sale implied proportional closing at the rear and that parallel lines are a deviation requiring explicit mention. However, the court of appeal reversed this decision, citing the precedent from Bourguignon v. Boudousquie, which establishes that land sold on a watercourse typically conveys a rectangular shape unless otherwise specified. The court noted that if a tract is sold in parts and insufficient land remains, the first buyer's claim takes precedence.
A U.S. government survey from 1871 indicates that nearby tracts are generally shaped as parallelograms or trapezoids, with adjacent Section 48 being trapezoidal and inversely proportioned to the parent tract, while Section 50 was historically owned by Gatien Decuir and divided by parallel lines. A writ was granted to review the appellate court's judgment.
The 1828 Bourguignon opinion established that side lines are presumed parallel unless otherwise stated in the deed, as affirmed by cases such as Henderson v. St. Charles Church and Bourgeat v. Bourgeat. When a property is conveyed by specified dimensions, it is interpreted as lying between parallel lines unless indicated otherwise. Subsequent jurisprudence, including Bergeron v. Daspit and Ramos Lumber Mfg. Company v. Sanders, reinforced this principle, affirming that a sale of land described by its front and depth implies a parallelogram shape.
Gatien Decuir's initial conveyance in 1882 was consistent with established law, designating a parallel strip from his trapezoidal property. However, concerns about the implications of successive parallel conveyances may have led him to specify converging lines in a later sale. Nonetheless, this later stipulation did not invalidate the original conveyance, which remained governed by the presumption of parallel lines.
The law, particularly LSA-C.C. art. 793, favors earlier titles when tracing ownership, supporting the conclusion that Decuir's original intent was to sell a parallel strip. Evidence of this intent is demonstrated through an old fence that runs parallel to the Hurst tract's boundary, despite some meandering. Prior to trial, parties agreed that possession issues were not relevant, and boundaries would be determined by title. Testimony from land surveyors was deemed largely irrelevant as it was influenced by client preferences and did not address legal principles.
The only substantial evidence of intent is the ancient fence line, confirming the parallel nature of the boundaries. A mineral lease executed in 1944 further describes the Hurst property dimensions, indicating the land's configuration with converging lines in the rear.
Expert surveyor Hargrave argues that the lease in question lacks significance as oil, gas, and mineral leases do not accurately represent property titles. He asserts that it is inappropriate to retroactively reverse established legal precedents regarding property boundaries, particularly those dating back to 1882. The law stipulates that property sidelines are equidistant unless otherwise specified in the title, and that the first purchaser has priority over subsequent buyers. In 1882, Gatien Decuir sold land to Leonce Decuir with specific dimensions, indicating a parallelogram shape, which supports the conclusion that the side boundaries of the Hurst tract are parallel. The court of appeal's decision on this matter is affirmed, despite dissent from Justices Calogero, Dennis, and Lemmon.
The document references various legal principles, including the imprescriptible right to fix boundaries, and defines an arpent in relation to acres. The plaintiffs and defendants are identified, along with relevant legal citations and historical cases. The analysis suggests that the defendant's claims regarding property dimensions are unsupported, indicating that the boundaries should not diverge towards the rear. Expert testimony from Laws contends that the boundary situation near False River is misrepresented, aligning with the 1871 government survey that confirms parallel lines in certain sections.
