Legal Opinion · Dissent

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Landry

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided June 20, 1989No. CA 87 1459Published

1DissentSavoie, Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. I find that the trial court was correct in placing the burden of proof on the Landrys and in finding that the Lan-drys did not carry the burden of proving thirty year acquisitive prescription.

BURDEN OF PROOF

Under the provisions of LSA-C.C.P. art. 3654 the first issue that must be determined is the question of current possession. Possession determines who has the burden of proof. When one party claims possession of one year to the exclusion of the other party and the court finds as a matter of fact that one party had possession for one year,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Hill v. RicheySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1952
  2. Norton v. AddieSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1976
  3. City of New Orleans v. New Orleans Canal, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1982
  4. Martel v. HuntSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1940
  5. Succession of Kemp v. RobertsonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1975

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API