Quantum Res. Mgmt. v. Pirate Lake Oil Corp.

• Decision Date: 19 March 2013
• Docket Number: No. 2012–C–1472.,2012–C–1472.
• Citation: 112 So.3d 209
• Parties: QUANTUM RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, L.L.C. and Milagro Producing, L.L.C. v. PIRATE LAKE OIL CORP., et al.
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court

112 So.3d 209

QUANTUM RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, L.L.C. and Milagro Producing, L.L.C.

v.PIRATE LAKE OIL CORP., et al.

No. 2012–C–1472.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 19, 2013.

Sidney L. Shushan, APLC, Sidney Levin Shushan, Esq., Jonathan Marks Shushan, Esq., New Orleans, LA, for Applicant.

Barrios Kingsdorf & Casteix, Bruce Steven Kingsdorf, Esq., Barbara Treuting Casteix, Esq., Simon, Peragine, Smith & Redfearn, LLP, Donald Joseph Brannan, Esq., Doug Freret Wynne, Jr., Esq., New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.

KNOLL, Justice.^*

[2012-1472 (La. 1]This civil case involves a 1925 tax sale in Jefferson Parish and the failure to give notice of the pending tax sale to the property owner. In Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams, 462 U.S. 791, 103 S.Ct. 2706, 77 L.Ed.2d 180 (1983), the United States Supreme Court held the failure of the State to give notice of a pending tax sale to a property owner is a violation of due process, rendering the tax sale null and void. The specific issue in the present case is whether Mennonite can be applied retroactively to invalidate this 1925 tax sale.

Plaintiffs, owners of oil, gas, and mineral interests, filed this instant concursus proceeding against four groups of record landowners, Pirate Lake Oil Corporation, the Mayronne Group, the Handlin–Jones Group, and the Zodiac Group, to determine the parties entitled to the proceeds of production. The Mayronne and Handlin–Jones Groups filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the Zodiac Group had no interest in the property. The District Court granted the motion for summary judgment and dismissed the Zodiac Group's claims of ownership in the property with prejudice. The Court of Appeal affirmed, finding the Zodiac Group's ancestor in title was never the record owner of the property. Further, the Zodiac Group traced its ownership of the property to a 1925 [2012-1472 (La. 2]tax sale, and there was no evidence the Sheriff provided notice of the sale to the record owner of the property, as required by the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause under Mennonite.Quantum Res. Mgmt., L.L.C. v. Pirate Lake Oil Corp., 11–813 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/31/12); 98 So.3d 394. We granted this writ to further consider the correctness vel non of the appellate court's decision. Quantum Res. Mgmt., L.L.C. v. Pirate Lake Oil Corp., 12–1472 (La.11/9/12); 100 So.3d 822.

For the following reasons, we find Mennonite cannot apply retroactively to invalidate the 1925 tax sale for lack of notice. Further, while the Zodiac Group's ancestor in title was not the record owner of the property, any defect is cured by the five-year peremptive period of Article X, § 11 of the 1921 Louisiana Constitution. Accordingly, we reverse the judgments of the lower courts.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In 2010, plaintiffs, Quantum Resources Management, L.L.C. (“Quantum”) and Milagro Producing, L.L.C. (“Milagro”), filed a concursus petition pursuant to La.Code Civ. Proc. art. 4651 et seq., alleging they were the owners of several oil, gas, and mineral leases covering Lots 1–5 and Lots 35–38 in the Third Jefferson Drainage District, in Sections 13 and 24, Township 16 South, Range 23 East, near Lafitte in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. Quantum asserted it was the unit operator of the CRIS 2 RA SUA Unit (the “Subject Unit”), established by Office of Conservation Order No. 1414, effective February 25, 1997. The aforementioned lots contribute acreage to the Subject Unit, which currently has two producing wells, known as the Mayronne No. 1 Well and the Mayronne No. 2 Well. In order to pay the proceeds of production to the proper parties, Quantum and Milagro named as defendants the following parties listed in the public records as having possible ownership interests in the lots: (1) Pirate Lake Oil Corporation; (2) George J. Mayronne, Jr., Agatha B. Mayronne Haydel, the Succession of Oswald [2012-1472 (La. 3]Harry Mayronne, and Huey J. Mayronne (collectively the “Mayronne Group”); (3) Joseph K. Handlin, II, Alan Kent Jones, Jennifer Elizabeth Jones, Patrick Kent Lindsay Jones, and Jacqueline A.L. Jones (collectively the “Handlin–Jones Group”); and (4) Zodiac Corporation, Ltd. and Salzer & Ramos Enterprises, Ltd. (collectively the “Zodiac Group”).

This present writ concerns a dispute between the Mayronne and Handlin–Jones Groups (or “Respondents”) and the Zodiac Group, as to the ownership of Lot 4 in the Third Jefferson Drainage District within the Subject Unit (“Lot 4”). The parties note Lot 4 is covered by several feet of water and located in an area called “the Pen,” near Lafitte, which is used primarily for fishing and crabbing.

The Mayronne and Handlin–Jones Groups' claim of title is based on a sale of Lot 4 from John S. Wells to George Mayronne dated August 8, 1938, recorded in Jefferson Parish (COB 144, Page 7). Wells acquired Lot 4 in an August 30, 1919 tax sale for 1918 unpaid taxes assessed in the name of Virgil Nobles (COB 46, Page 158). Mayronne's title in and to Lot 4 later devolved to the Mayronne and Handlin–Jones Groups. An affidavit by Larry E. Porterfield, the Respondents' professional land surveyor, confirms the Lot 4 purchased by George Mayronne is the same Lot 4 within the boundaries of the Subject Unit.

In turn, the Zodiac Group's claim of ownership is based on a tax sale dated August 22, 1925, where property identified as “Lot 4” of the Third Jefferson Drainage District assessed in the name of Erie (Eric) T. White was conveyed to John A. Saxton for unpaid 1924 taxes assessed in the name of White (COB 70, Page 617). Subsequently, on October 30, 1931, Saxton conveyed the property to the Zodiac Corporation, Ltd. (COB 112, Page 331). On April 28, 1949, Zodiac Corporation, Ltd. conveyed an undivided one-half interest in the property to Robert R. Ramos, whose rights have now devolved to Salzer & Ramos Enterprises, Ltd. (COB 307, Page 681).

[2012-1472 (La. 4]According to the affidavit of the Mayronne and Handlin–Jones Groups' surveyor, the Lot 4 owned by White was not the same Lot 4 located within the boundaries of the Subject Unit. The Public Records of Jefferson Parish indicate the Louisiana Meadows Company transferred “Lot 4 of Block 8, the town of Lafitte,” a separate piece of property, to White in 1915 (COB 35, Page 243). The 1922 Jefferson Parish Tax Assessment Rolls correctly describe the property as “Farm Lots 167–847–848– & 4 B 8 Barataria–15 acres Freshwater A 100.” The 1924 Tax Assessment Rolls, however, mistakenly describe the property as “Farm Lots 167–847–848– & 4 Cont. 15.45 acres Barataria–15 acres Freshwater ‘A’ 100.” Based on this inaccurate description, the State transferred Lot 4 of the Third Jefferson Drainage District to Saxton, the Zodiac Group's ancestor in title.

On December 22, 2010, the Mayronne and Handlin–Jones Groups filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the Zodiac Group had no right, title, or interest in and to Lot 4. Respondents maintain the 1925 tax sale to Saxton was an absolute nullity because White never actually owned Lot 4 and because there is no evidence the Sheriff gave notice to the record owner of Lot 4, violating the due process notice requirements established by Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams, 462 U.S. 791, 103 S.Ct. 2706, 77 L.Ed.2d 180 (1983). The Zodiac Group argued the attack on the 1925 tax sale was untimely under the five-year peremptive period for annulling tax sales under Article X, § 11 of the 1921 Louisiana Constitution.¹ The District Court granted the motion for summary judgment, dismissing the Zodiac Group's claims of ownership with prejudice. The court found, as White never owned Lot 4, the Sheriff could not transfer any ownership interest by the tax sale to Saxton. Additionally, the court ruled the lack of notice to the record owners of Lot 4 violated the Due Process Clause under Mennonite.

[2012-1472 (La. 5]The Court of Appeal affirmed, finding the 1925 tax sale was an absolute nullity, as White was neither the record owner nor the actual owner of Lot 4, and the record owner of Lot 4 did not receive notice of the tax sale. Quantum Res. Mgmt., L.L.C. v. Pirate Lake Oil Corp., 11–813 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/31/12); 98 So.3d 394. On appeal, the Zodiac Group filed an exception of no cause of action based on peremption. The court denied this exception, noting when a debtor's due process rights are violated because of lack of adequate notice of a tax sale as required by Mennonite, the five-year peremptive period of La. Const. art. X, § 11 does not run. Id. at 398.

The Zodiac Group, citing Gulotta v. Cutshaw, 283 So.2d 482 (La.1973), argued the lack of notice to the record owner made the 1925 tax sale a relative nullity, which was cured by the five-year peremptive period. However, the appellate court held Mennonite's elevation of the notice requirement to a due process violation renders a tax sale with this deficiency an absolute nullity, effectively overruling Gulotta.Id. at 399 (citing State, through Dep't of Transp. & Dev. v. Knight, 93–767 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/2/94); 631 So.2d 714). As the 1925 tax sale was an absolute nullity, the Mayronne and Handlin–Jones Groups could challenge the tax sale collaterally at any time. ²

DISCUSSION

Standard of Review

On a motion for summary judgment, this Court reviews the record de novo to determine whether there is any genuine issue of material fact, and whether the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. La.Code Civ. Proc. art. 966; [2012-1472 (La. 6]Harrah's Bossier City Inv. Co., L.L.C. v. Bridges, 09–1916, p. 8 (La.5/11/10); 41 So.3d 438, 445. Initially, the movant bears the burden of proof. La.Code Civ. Proc. art. 966(C)(2). However, if the movant will not bear the burden of proof at trial, the movant is not required to negate all essential elements of the adverse party's claim, but merely point to an absence of factual support for one or more of the elements essential to the adverse party's claim, action, or defense. Id. If the movant successfully meets...