Wendorf v. Corley, 7931
| Decision Date | 17 December 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 7931,7931 |
| Citation | 394 So.2d 1252 |
| Parties | Denver F. WENDORF et al., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Earl CORLEY et al., Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
Gist, Methvin, Hughes & Munsterman, Dorwan G. Vizzier, Alexandria, for plaintiff-appellant.
Charles B. Bice, Winnfield, for defendant-appellee.
Before CULPEPPER, DOMENGEAUX and SWIFT, JJ.
This case and our docket No. 7932, entitled "Wendorf Realty Company, Inc. v. Earl Corley, et al.", 394 So.2d 1256, have been consolidated for trial and appeal as they arose from a trespass by defendants, Earl Corley and James Delaney, in building a fence on the property of plaintiff, Wendorf Realty Co., Inc. (Wendorf Realty), without its consent. From a judgment denying their claims for damages, the plaintiffs have appealed.
Wendorf Realty owns land in the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 6 North, Range 1 West, in Grant Parish, Louisiana. The northern boundary of Wendorf Realty's property is the southern boundary of property owned by defendant, Earl Corley. Their common boundary is also the southern boundary of the North Half of the Northwest quarter of Section 34.
A public road referred to as Hooper Road proceeds generally in a northeast to southwest direction across the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34. It makes a turn more to the west near the southern boundary of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter and gradually crosses into the South Half thereof.
During 1974 some of Corley's cattle went through an old fence and grazed on the cotton crop on Wendorf Realty's land. Mr. Wendorf, the principal shareholder in Wendorf Realty, complained to Corley. In response to these complaints in February, 1975, the defendants constructed a fence to enclose Corley's land. The fence, which Corley said he believed was on the boundary line between his property and that of Wendorf Realty, was erected south of Hooper Road after its westerly turn near the southern boundary of said North Half of the Northwest Quarter. It encroached from about four to seventy feet in places on Wendorf Realty's property. Also, it extended without a gate or "cattle gap" across an old drive to a vacant and ramshackle house situated on Wendorf Realty's land.
Mssrs. Wendorf and Kemp testified they had agreed to lease 30 acres of the property adjacent to the house for the purpose of raising watermelons. Wendorf Realty was to receive 1/4 of the profits from the crop and Wendorf and Kemp would split the other 3/4ths. It was also agreed that Kemp would rent the house for $75.00 per month after necessary repairs were made by Wendorf Realty so that Kemp's family could live therein.
Mr. Wendorf testified that after the fence was constructed he called Corley on the telephone to complain about the fence, but Corley hung up on him. No demand for removal of the fence was ever made. No watermelons were planted on the 30 acres.
On February 18, 1976, Wendorf and Kemp filed suit against Earl Corley and James Delaney for $18,000.00 damages allegedly sustained due to the loss of the watermelon crop. Wendorf Realty also filed a separate suit against the same two defendants claiming the following damages by reason of the trespass:
Cost of cattle gap .................................... $ 4,750.00
Cost of installation of cattle gap .................... 2,500.00
Loss of 1/4 of watermelon crop ........................ 6,000.00
Loss of cotton by virtue of cattle damage ............. 12,500.00
Cost of construction of fence on north property line .. 5,050.00
Loss of rent at $75.00 per month ...................... 900.00
Cost of survey ........................................ 400.00
Damages to dog houses as a result of fire ............. 2,850.00
Damages to barn as a result of fire ................... 1,050.00
----------
TOTAL ................................................. $36,000.00
Defendants denied practically all of the allegations of the petitions and pleaded one year prescription as to the claims for cotton damages.
By agreement of the parties and with the court's consent the matter was converted into a boundary action in addition to the claims for damages. Randolph B. LaCroix, Jr. was appointed to survey the boundaries and fences located between the lands of Wendorf Realty and Earl Corley. All of the parties accepted the completed survey and it was agreed that judgment would be rendered fixing the common boundary as established thereby. It reflects that the fence constructed by the defendants encroached on Wendorf Realty's property. This portion of the judgment and the order directing the defendants to remove the fence from Wendorf Realty's land, of course, are not in contest on the appeal. The plaintiffs have abandoned all claims for damages except loss of the watermelon crop and rentals for the house.
The trial judge denied the claim for the watermelon crop stating, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
93 1637 La.App. 1 Cir. 5/23/95, IP Timberlands Operating Co., Ltd. v. Denmiss Corp.
...on one's property, even when committed in good faith and also when proof of actual damages is uncertain. Id.; Wendorf v. Corley, 394 So.2d 1252 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1980). When damages are insusceptible of precise measurement, much discretion [93 1637 La.App. 1 Cir. 29] shall be left to the cou......
-
In re James Noel Flying Service, Inc.
...Associates, Inc., supra; M & A Farms Ltd. v. Town of Ville Platte, 422 So.2d 708, 711 (La.App. 3d Cir.1982); Wendorf v. Corley, 394 So.2d 1252, 1255 (La.App.3d Cir.1980). Again, this question presents no factual issue for trial, only the legal question of whether a corporation can suffer su......
-
Versai Management, Inc. v. Monticello Forest Products Corp., CA
...recoverable even though the tort-feasor acts in good faith. Rougeau v. Moody, 396 So.2d 987 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1981); Wendorf v. Corley, 394 So.2d 1252 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1980); Bentley v. Industrial Fire Protection Company, 338 So.2d 1177 (La.App. 2nd Cir.1976). The cost of removing stumps and......
-
Terre Aux Borufs Land v. J.R. Gray Barge
...Louisiana courts have awarded damages for illegal trespass on one's property, even when committed in good faith. Wendorf v. Corley, 394 So.2d 1252, 1254 (La.App. 3 Cir.1980) and cases cited In support of the trial judge's finding that the tort of trespass may be committed unintentionally un......