Court Opinion

ID: 9670496
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:21:36.372436+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:05.038328
License: Public Domain

HAMITER, Justice
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I agree that the title to the property involved herein is vested in the City of New Orleans; that Section 8(1) of the City Charter provides specific legislative authority for the sale of city property no longer necessary for public use, except that thereunder the alienation of a public park or public square must be approved in writing by 70%. of the property owners within a radius of 300 feet thereof; and that no such approval was secured in this case.
However, I am unable to conclude from the record that “Place du Commerce” was and is in fact a public park or public square. Whether it is to be so considered and treated was not made an issue by the pleadings, and no evidence relating thereto was introduced. The question arose for the first time in this court.
I am of the opinion that the cause, in the interest of justice and pursuant to Code of Practice, Article 906, should be remanded to the district court for further proceedings concerning that particular question, granting leave to both litigants to offer appropriate amendments to their pleadings and to introduce any relevant and otherwise admissible evidence.