Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dudenhefer v. Meraux Land Development, L.L.C.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided February 26, 2003No. 2002-CA-0863Published

1Dissent

hPLOTKIN, J.,

dissents with reasons.

I would affirm as amended the judgment of the lower court in that I find that the record supports the lower court’s finding that plaintiff, Eugene Dudenhefer (“Du-denhefer”) acquired the disputed strips of land, “Bayou Y” and “Bayou Z,” by thirty-year acquisitive prescription under Louisiana Civil Code Article 794.

I agree with the majority opinion that Dudenhefer is not able to obtain ownership of “Bayou Y” and “Bayou Z” by prescription of ten years because his legal title to Lots “Y” and “Z” do not transfer the adjoining bayou property. Furthermore, the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rathborne v. HaleLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1996
  2. Cuthbertson v. Unopened Succession of TateLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1989
  3. Thibodeaux v. SalassiLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1976

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API