Court Opinion

ID: 9662286
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:04:47.64374+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:38.358195
License: Public Domain

SANDERS, Justice
(dissenting).
In Louisiana, a predial lease is a contract by which one party for a price gives to the other the enjoyment of land for a stipulated term. LSA-C.C. Arts. 2669, 2674. Unlike a lease at common law, it creates no estate in the land. Bloom v. Southern Amusement Company, 228 La. 44, 81 So.2d 763; Rials v. Davis, 212 La. 161, 31 So.2d 726; 51C C.J.S. Landlord & Tenant § 202 (4), p. 521. The lessee’s rights under the lease are classified as personal rights, as distinguished from real rights. They are often classified as rights ad rem, or upon the thing, since they include the right to use and enjoy the land. Columbia Gulf Transmission Company v. Hoyt, 252 La. 921, 215 *1113So.2d 114; Yiannopoulos, Civil Law of Property, § 95, p. 277 (1966).
If the land is expropriated during the term of a lease, the lease terminates. The lessee has no claim for damages against the lessor. LSA-C.C. Art. 2697. The lessee may, however, look to the expropriator for his damages for loss of the lease. See Columbia Gulf Transmission Company v. Hoyt, supra. Normally, the loss is measured by the lease advantage, that is, the difference between the contract rent and a higher economic rent. State Through Department of Highways v. Levy, 242 La. 259, 136 So.2d 35; In Re Morgan R. R. & S. S. Co., 32 La.Ann. 371.
When, as here, the expropriation of land results in a lease termination, the landowner is entitled to recover the following in the expropriation:
A. The present value of the property which would have reverted to the lessor at the end of the lease; and
B. The present value of the anticipated rent for the term of the lease.
The lessee is entitled to recover his damages composed of the lease advantage, discounted to its present value, plus the present value of any improvements constructed by the lessee and to be retained by him under the terms of the lease. Comment, Expropriation — Compensable Items in Louisiana, 24 La.L.Rev. 849, 873-875.
Obviously, there should be no duplicate award of the lease advantage to the landowner and the lessee. The court should award the lease advantage only to the lessee, since the award is for the lessee’s damages.
Unlike the majority, I am unable to determine from the record in the present case that the lower courts awarded the lease advantage both to the landowner and lessee, thereby duplicating the award. Apparently, the majority relies only on the terminology used by the appraisers in computing the value of the improvements, that is, “reproduction cost, less depreciation.” I believe this is insufficient. Moreover, the result cannot be reached without overruling State v. Ferris, 227 La. 13, 78 So.2d 493 (1955), in which this Court passed upon a similar award. In its Court of Appeal briefs, the State concedes that State v. Ferris supports the Court of Appeal decision.
Since I remain unconvinced that the lower courts made a duplicate award of the lease advantage to the landowner and since the majority has failed to confront State v. Ferris, I adhere to the result reached by the Court of Appeal.
For the reasons assigned, I respectfully dissent. • ■
Rehearing denied.
HAMLIN, SANDERS and SUMMERS, JJ., are of the opinion a rehearing ^hould be granted. ...