Article by Cameron Ott
The noted case is a significant development in Louisiana jurisprudence because it marks the first time that a state court has interpreted the subsequent purchaser doctrine to include property transfers from family members to a company that they also own. Although the Louisiana First Circuit formulated its decision by referencing case law and foundational principles found in the Civil Code such as personal and real property rights, the court did not take into account the unique nature of the property transfer in question, leaving its analysis incomplete. This Note seeks to address the potential ramifications of this new expansion of the subsequent purchaser doctrine through the lens of the particular circumstances associated with New 90's acquisition of Shady Retreat Plantation. Part II provides an overview of the origins and evolution of the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana jurisprudence. Part III discusses the Louisiana First Circuit's novel interpretation of the rule and the relevant case law used to justify its reasoning. Part IV analyzes how the court failed to consider the practical effects of applying this doctrine in the noted case. Part V briefly concludes.
About the Author
Cameron Ott, J.D. Candidate 2024, Tulane University Law School; B.A. 2021, University of Louisiana Monroe. Thank you to Professor Sally Brown Richardson and the attorneys at Stagg Liuzza, LLC for their assistance and guidance in understanding this Recent Development. I would also like to thank my fiancée, Allison Newton, for her constant support and encouragement.
Citation
97 Tul. L. Rev. 629