Case ID: so_196/html/0564-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "FOURNET, Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

195 La. 376
    HAAS v. REESE et al.
    No. 35725.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 29, 1940.
    Rehearing Denied May 27, 1940.
    Gordon B. Hyde and John T. Charbon-net, both of New Orleans, for appellants.
    Couvillon & Couvillon and Joffrion & Bordelon, all of Marksville, and McCoy & King, of Lake Charles, for appellee.
   FOURNET, Justice.

This is a companion suit to the case of Amerada Petroleum Corporation v. Reese et al., 196 So. 558, and the opinion in that case disposes of the issues raised here.

The fact that the plaintiff in this case acquired royalty deeds from seven of the co-owners, in addition to mineral leases from three of them, without the consent or concurrence of the other co-owners, does not make any difference in the result, for the reason, as explained in the Amer-ada case, that where property is held in in-división between several co-ozvners, none can confer rights on the entirety of the common property without the consent of all the others.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the lower court is annulled and set aside, and it is now ordered, adjudged and decreed that plaintiff’s suit is dismissed at his cost.

O’NIELL, C. J., docs not take part.