Martin Timber Co. v. Pegues

11 CARAWAY, Judge,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion.

Just because it is harsh to employ the forfeiture penalty of this contract, does not justify a court’s resort to equity. Martin contracted to optionally maintain its rights in this timber and neglected to exercise its last optional payment. Martin could elect to pay and defer the harvest, but was not obligated to pay or ever harvest. Failing to recognize that distinction, the majority’s employment of La. C.C: art.2013’s “doctrine” for the judicial control of the dissolution of a breached lease is improper. The law…