Adams v. S. Lafourche Levee Dist.

• Decision Date: 27 June 2016
• Docket Number: Nos. 2015 CA 0507,2015 CA 0508.,s. 2015 CA 0507
• Citation: 199 So.3d 20
• Parties: Jason and Stacey ADAMS, Richard Racki and Angela Racki, Ernest Kiger, Sr., Lorraine Cheramie, Joanne Bellanger, Raymond Orgeron, Wayne Lee, Sr., Ijnace Adams, Jr., Jerry Ledet, Debra Chandler, Early H. Horton, Ray Ledet, and Pamela George v. SOUTH LAFOURCHE LEVEE DISTRICT. 5 Chers, Inc. v. South Lafourche Levee District.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

199 So.3d 20

Jason and Stacey ADAMS, Richard Racki and Angela Racki, Ernest Kiger, Sr., Lorraine Cheramie, Joanne Bellanger, Raymond Orgeron, Wayne Lee, Sr., Ijnace Adams, Jr., Jerry Ledet, Debra Chandler, Early H. Horton, Ray Ledet, and Pamela George

v.SOUTH LAFOURCHE LEVEE DISTRICT.

5 Chers, Inc.

v.South Lafourche Levee District.

Nos. 2015 CA 0507

2015 CA 0508.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

June 27, 2016.

Loulan J. Pitre, Jr., Aimee Williams Hebert, Jane A. Jackson, New Orleans, LA, for Defendant–1st Appellant, South Lafourche Levee District.

George B. Recile, Preston L. Hayes, Metairie, LA, for Plaintiffs–2nd Appellants, Jason Adams, et al.

Jack E. Chappuis, Jr., Francis J. Lobrano, W. Allen Schafer, Belle Chasse, LA, for Plaintiff–Appellee, 5 Chers, Inc.

Patrick M. Amedee, Marla E. Mitchell, Thibodaux, LA, for Amicus Curae, North Lafourche Conservation Levee and Drainage District.

Before PETTIGREW, HIGGINBOTHAM, and CRAIN, JJ.

HIGGINBOTHAM, J.

This consolidated matter concerns a class action and individual lawsuit filed in response to an appropriated permanent levee servitude that included the excavation of dirt for a hurricane protection project affecting 355 tracts of land in Lafourche Parish. The pertinent issue on appeal is what compensation, if any, is due the landowners for the appropriation.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On January 10, 2011, the Board of Commissioners of the South Lafourche Levee District ("Levee District") adopted Resolution 11–01 (the "Resolution"), appropriating a permanent levee servitude that affected 355 tracts of land located on the west bank of the existing levee along Bayou Lafourche. The purpose of the appropriation was to upgrade and increase the size of the existing permanent levee for improved flood control in a Hurricane Protection Project area from Larose to Golden Meadow, Louisiana. The Resolution gave the Levee District the right to "construct, operate and maintain levees ... and other flood control works including the right to cut away, dredge or remove spoil or earth therefrom and for the deposit of same as may be necessary in the construction, operation and maintenance" of the hurricane protection project. Pursuant to the Resolution, the landowners would continue to own the appropriated property subject to the permanent levee servitude, but would give up their surface rights in the appropriated area due to the Levee District's use of the dirt for levee improvements. Landowners affected by the appropriation were notified by letter dated January 10, 2011, that contractors for the Levee District would soon "begin the process of removing earthen material from the property appropriated for use in improving" the levee, and that the Levee District would pay "fair market value for the property appropriated" as soon as that amount was determined.

The Levee District began mailing checks to landowners in late April 2011, based upon an estimated appraised value of the land that depended on the amount of acreage involved and whether the Levee District had classified the tract as "clear" or "unclear." According to the general manager of the Levee District, Windell A. Curole, the Levee District retained three appraisers and received appraisals for five of the affected tracts of land after physically observing each piece of property affected by the appropriation to see if it was cleared or uncleared. Using this method, the Levee District estimated the fair market value of each tract of land. If the land was vacant/clear, it was valued at $1,932.78 per acre; if the land was wooded/unclear, it was valued at $1,452.94 per acre.

On September 13, 2011, Jason Adams and eleven other landowners affected by the Levee District's appropriation filed a class action lawsuit (hereafter referred to as "the Adams class"), contending that the amounts paid and/or offered according to the Levee District's appraised/assigned values of all tracts of land were "grossly insufficient, and do not reflect the fair market value of the tracts of land." On April 20, 2012, the district court certified the Adams class, defining the class as the owners of 133 tracts and/or those persons with an ownership interest in the land taken who did not cash checks issued by the Levee District. Additionally, a sub-class was defined as the owners of 187 tracts and/or those persons with an ownership interest in the land taken who cashed checks issued by the Levee District. Another landowner, 5 Chers, Inc. (hereafter referred to as "5 Chers"), opted out of the Adams class and filed its own lawsuit on May 14, 2012. On May 2, 2013, the district court signed an order consolidating the Adams class action and the 5 Chers lawsuit for trial. Collectively, we refer to all of the plaintiffs in these consolidated matters as the "landowners." All landowners contend that they were offered or paid less than the fair market value for the appropriated tracts of land, and that they were not compensated for the dirt that the Levee District excavated from the appropriated properties. The landowners also sought attorney fees and costs associated with the litigation.

A four-day bench trial was held in January 2014. The parties entered written trial stipulations of fact that removed sixty-six tracts from the Adams class for a variety of reasons including the donation of some tracts to the Levee District, the opting out by some landowners who entered into servitude agreements with the Levee District, and tracts that were designated as "no work zones," had no acreage within the appropriated area, or were owned by the Levee District. The parties also entered into a written post-trial stipulation that the Adams class action did not include any claims made in a third lawsuit involving an appropriated tract owned by Chad M. Jarreau and leased to Bayou Construction & Trucking, LLC. The Jarreau lawsuit was tried separately in another division of the Seventeenth Judicial District Court. This court recently rendered a decision in an appeal of the Jarreau lawsuit, which involved many of the same issues as are currently presented in the Adams class action and 5 Chers lawsuit. We acknowledge that an application for writ of certiorari is currently pending before the Louisiana Supreme Court in the Jarreau case; however, no stay has ever been requested or issued in the case sub judice pending a final disposition of the Jarreau matter. See South Lafourche Levee District v. Jarreau, 2015–0328 (La.App. 1st Cir.3/30/16), 192 So.3d 214(hereafter referred to as "the Jarreau case" or "Jarreau ").

After the trial on the merits for the Adams class action and the 5 Chers lawsuit, the parties submitted post-trial briefs. On November 10, 2014, the district court issued written reasons for judgment, signing a judgment on the same day, and finding in favor of the landowners on the issue of the fair market value compensation for the appropriated servitude affecting the landowners' property. The district court collectively awarded $1,556,378.00 to the Adams class/sub-class (as shown on a spreadsheet attached to the judgment and subject to a credit for payments made to the members of the sub-class) and $40,662.00 to 5 Chers. In written reasons, the district court explained that the permanent levee servitude acquired by the Levee District amounted to 80% of the fair market value of the appropriated property, with the landowners retaining a 20% interest in the land that was taken. Additionally, the district court awarded the landowners legal interest, attorney fees of 25% of the total sums awarded, and all costs of the proceedings. Finally, the district court dismissed all of the remaining claims of the landowners concerning the issue of additional compensation for the Levee District's taking of the excavated dirt from the appropriated property.

After the district court signed the November 10, 2014 judgment, the Adams class timely filed a "Motion for Partial New Trial on the Issue of the Credit and/or Motion for Partial Amendment of Judgment" on November 21, 2014. The Adams class contended that the spreadsheet attached to the judgment appeared to include checks that had been issued to landowners who ultimately had opted out of the Adams class, as well as one check that exceeded the amount adjudged to be due the landowner. Therefore, the Adams class asked the district court to grant a partial new trial or partially amend the judgment to accurately reflect and clarify the amount of the credit due the Levee District. But before the district court ruled on the Adams class's motion, the Levee District filed a motion for appeal "from the final judgment rendered on November 10, 2014." The trial court granted the Levee District's appeal on December 18, 2014. Not long afterward, on January 21, 2015, the Adams class filed its own motion for appeal from the November 10, 2014 judgment, which the district court granted on January 28, 2015. The parties in both appeals dispute the amounts of compensation awarded to the landowners and, additionally, the Levee District contends that the attorney fees award is erroneous.

Approximately two months after the second motion for appeal was filed, the district court signed a consent judgment on March 11, 2015, granting the Adams class's motion for partial new trial "on the limited issue of the calculation of the credit which the Court previously found to be due" to the Levee District. The consent judgment was based upon a written joint stipulation by the Adams class and the Levee District, clarifying "any credit found to be due" to the Levee District. No appeal was taken from the March 11, 2015 judgment, but in oral reasons, the district court stated that the consent judgment would "be included with the issues on appeal ... [s]o that extended the return date." The appeals concerning the original November 10, 2014 judgment were lodged in this court on March 25, 2015. While 5 Chers did not file an appeal, it submitted briefs in support of the Adams...