Keller v. Haas
Citation | 12 So.2d 238,202 La. 486 |
Decision Date | 01 February 1943 |
Docket Number | 36121. |
Court | Supreme Court of Louisiana |
Parties | KELLER et al. v. HAAS et al. |
Anthony J. Roy, of Marksville, and Jackson & Mayer and Tucker, Bronson & Martin, all of Shreveport for plaintiffs and appellants.
Couvillon & Couvillon and Laborde & Edwards, all of Marksville for defendants and appellees.
The plaintiffs, Anna Laura Keller and Charles L. Mayer, brought this suit seeking to be recognized as the owners of an undivided three-fourths interest in a tract of land containing thirty-five acres, situated in Avoyelles Parish, and to recover three-fourths of all rents and revenues received from the property since July 9, 1915, less their proportionate part of the taxes for the year 1914 and subsequent years, after the rendering of an accounting. The defendants, W. D. Haas and Haas Investment Company, Inc., interposed exceptions of no right and no cause of action and a plea of estoppel. Sid W. Richardson, George H. McIntyre, George H. Campbell and J. A. Hoover intervened and asked to be decreed the owners of an oil, gas and mineral lease, executed by the Haas Investment Company, on the described property. The exceptions of no right and no cause of action were sustained in the lower court, and the plaintiffs' suit was dismissed. The plaintiffs have appealed.
The plaintiffs allege in their petition that the thirty-five acre tract of land was acquired on October 7, 1881 by Octavia, Polly (Mollie), Alva (George Alva), and Annie (Annie Laura) Keller; that Polly Keller died about the year 1890, leaving no descendants and being survived only by her mother, Emely Hampton Keller, and her sisters and brothers, Octavia, George Alva, Anna Laura and Viola Keller; that on July 11, 1895, Octavia Keller conveyed to William David Haas an undivided one-fourth interest in and to the trust; that Emely Hampton Keller died about the year 1904, being survived by Octavia, George Alva, Anna Laura and Viola Keller; that Viola Keller died about the year 1914, being survived by only one child, Gladys Evans; that Octavia Keller died about the year 1916, being survived only by George Alva and Anna Laura Keller and Gladys Evans; that about the year 1917, Gladys Evans died, being survived by her father, Eddie Evans, her aunt and uncle, Anna Laura and George Alva Keller; that on August 29, 1900, Laura Keller conveyed to George Alva Keller an undivided one-third interest in and to the tract; that on July 11, 1939, George Alva Keller conveyed to Laura Bell (Anna Laura Keller) all of his right, title and interest in and to the thirty-five acre tract of land, and that on July 11, 1939, Laura Bell (Anna Laura Keller) conveyed to Charles L. Mayer an undivided one-half of her interest in and to the tract.
It is further alleged that on July 9, 1915 W. D. Haas acquired under a tax deed the interests in the land assessed to George and M. Keller for the delinquent taxes for the year 1914, and that on April 18, 1927, W. D. Haas conveyed the property herein involved, together with other properties, to the Haas Investment Company of which he was the principal stockholder, president and general manager. It is alleged that the corporation had full knowledge of all of the facts and circumstances surronding and out of which the tax sale arose.
A person allowing his property to be acquired at tax sale by one of his co-owners has a reasonable time to secure the redemption of his interest in the property upon paying the tax purchaser the proportionate part of the taxes due by him. Skannal v. Hespeth, 196 La. 87, 198 So. 661. However, the mere lapse of time, in the absence of other facts going to show that he must have known that the property had been sold; that he had an interest therein, and that he, in effect, acquiesced in the sale, or by some other act evidenced an intention on his part to renounce his interest in the property, would not debar him from recovering his interest in the property. Tyson v. York, 192 La. 373, 188 So. 33.
In the case of Skannal v. Hespeth, supra, the following doctrine from Duson v. Roos, 123 La. 835, 49 So. 590, 593, 131 Am. St.Rep. 375, was reaffirmed:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
...stating: 'The conclusion is, therefore, inescapable that Kennedy Sawmills, Inc., is the mere alter ego of Benton Creosoting Co., Inc. Keller v. Haas, 202 La. 486, 12 So.2d 238; Lindstrom v. Sauer, La.App. Orleans, 1936, 166 So. 636; Mayo v. Pioneer Bank & Trust Company, U.S.C.A.5th Cir., La......
-
Rivers v. Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp., 7729
... ... Keller v. Haas, 202 La. 486, 12 So.2d 238 (1943); National Surety Corporation v. Pope, 147 So.2d 239 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1962) ... " ... ...
-
Meraux v. R. R. Barrow, Inc.
... ... The facts in the instant case are sufficient to bring it under the rule as stated in Keller v. Haas, 202 La. 486, 492, 12 So.2d 238, 240: ... 'It is contended that the Haas Investment Company, Inc. is an innocent purchaser of ... ...
-
Guilbeau v. Jeanerette Lumber & Shingle Co.
... ... Each case must depend on its peculiar facts and circumstances. Keller v. Haas, 202 La. 486, 12 So.2d 238 ... In Atlantic Refining Company v. Golson, 127 So.2d 341, 343, Certiorari Denied (1961), the ... ...
-
Shale in Sale-Adaptive Resolution of Mineral Rights Disputes Through Warranty Law and Veil-Piercing Remedies
...identity, the Court is more willing to pierce the veil when shareholders are circumventing the law. 168. Id. at 758. 169. Keller v. Haas, 12 So. 2d 238, 239 (La. 1943). 170. Id. at 239–40. 171. Id. at 240. This language also reflects the negativity with which courts used to view solely owne......