Opinion ID: 1730119
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: servitude of view

Text: Lieber contends that Ordinance No. 40 of 1964 created a predial servitude of view. LSA-C.C. art. 716. [3] However, there is no evidence that the City of Shreveport has established a servitude of view in favor of the landowners around the lake. View is a continuous, apparent servitude which can be established only by title, destination of the owner or acquisitive prescription. There is no evidence that the landowners have acquired a servitude of view. LSA-C.C. arts. 727, [4] 728, [5] 765. [6] Even if such a servitude were established, it would not necessarily apply to a structure in the adjacent lake. A building prohibition servitude, being continuous and nonapparent, can be established only be title. LSA-C.C. art. 766. [7] See Bernos v. Canepa, 114 La. 517, 38 So. 438 (1905). Plaintiff is not entitled to an entirely unobstructed view of the lake. See LSA-C.C. art. 668. [8] The city determines, upon request, where structures extending into Cross Lake will be located. Although there may have been other feasible locations for this boathouse, the city's placement was not arbitrary or capricious. Judicial interference is not warranted. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is affirmed. AFFIRMED.