Legal Opinion

Deano v. Brouillette

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 16, 1995No. 94-CA-1856PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JiMURRAY, Judge.

Plaintiffs/appellees, Marilee V. Deano, Ronald A. Vallette, and Alice V. Bonomo (hereafter the Vallettes) sued defendant/appellant, R.A. Brouillette, to judicially establish the boundary between their contiguous properties, contending that a fence erected by Mr. Brouillette in 1993 encroaches upon their property some 35 + feet. Mr. Brouil-lette defended, denying the encroachment and, alternatively, pled thirty years acquisitive prescription.

The trial court rendered judgment in the Vallettes’ favor, dismissed Mr. Brouillette’s plea of acquisitive prescription, and ordered him…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rosell v. EscoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1989
  2. Hurst v. RicardLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1990
  3. Richard v. ThierryLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1987

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hooper v. Hero Lands Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2016
  2. Ogden v. ShawLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1996
  3. Gandy v. DeeseLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1997
  4. Side by Side Redevelopment, Inc. v. Ronald Magee and/or His Succession; Gwendolyn M. Esteen and/or Her Succession; & Adam Salup and/or His SuccessionLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API