Opinion ID: 1840053
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: classification of levee board's action

Text: When property is needed for levee purposes, the levee districts of this state can either appropriate or expropriate the necessary property. As early as 1893, it was recognized riparian lands needed for levee purposes could be taken without formal expropriation procedures because such lands are subject to a servitude under La. C.C. art. 665. [7] In Peart v. Meeker, 12 So. 490 (La. 1893), this court stated: [W]e consider the law of Louisiana too well settled to admit of further dispute to the following effect: That under article 665 of our Civil Code riparian property on navigable rivers in this state is subject to a servitude or easement imposed by law for the public or common utility, authorizing the appropriation by the government, under proper laws, of the space required for the making and repairing of levees, roads, and other public works; that the state is charged with the administration of this public servitude; that in locating and building levees she does not expropriate the property of the citizen, but lawfully appropriates it to a use which it is subject under the title itself; that in so doing she acts, not under the power of eminent domain, but in the exercise of the police power.... This right of appropriation has been characterized as the right to act first and talk later. Dickson v. Board of Com'rs of Caddo Levee Dist., 210 La. 121, 26 So.2d 474 (1946). In the instant case, as both parties correctly contend, Wynat's land was appropriated by the Levee Board when it passed the appropriating resolution on July 20, 1983. [8] Thus, the Levee Board's resolution effected an appropriation of Wynat's property for levee purposes. See A.K. Roy, Inc. v. Board of Com'rs for Pontchartrain Levee Dist., 237 La. 541, 111 So.2d 765 (1959); Board of Com'rs for Pontchartrain Levee Dist. v. Baron, 236 La. 846, 109 So.2d 441 (1959); Pillow v. Board of Com'rs for Fifth Louisiana Levee Dist., 425 So.2d 1267 (La.App. 2 Cir.1982); Burdin v. Board of Com'rs for Atchafalaya Basin Levee Dist., 533 So.2d 977 (La.App. 3 Cir.1988); Taylor v. Board of Levee Com'rs of Tensas Basin Levee Dist., 332 So.2d 495 (La.App. 3 Cir.1976); and Danziger v. United States, 93 F.Supp. 70 (E.D.La.1950). It is only when the levee district cannot appropriate or amicably acquire property needed for levee purposes that it need formally expropriate such property. La. R.S. 38:351. [9] In the instant case, the Levee Board clearly did not initiate formal expropriation proceedings pursuant to La. R.S. 38:351 et seq.