Court Opinion

ID: 9807179
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 19:52:41.417183+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:27:27.082446
License: Public Domain

CRICHTON, J.,
dissenting.
I,Boudreaux unwaveringly declared he was never given permission to use the passageway, and he and his ancestors in title always used the passageway as if it *573was their own. From an evidentiary standpoint, Boudreaux’s unambiguous declaration of his intent to possess as owner coupled with the legal presumption that he was possessing as owner caused the burden to shift to the defendant, Cummings, to marshal sufficient evidence to chip away, if not to erode, this presumption. This ultimately led to what I believe to be and, more importantly, what the trial court believed to be, a preponderance of evidence favoring Boudreaux. Cummings failed to present even a scintilla of evidence, instead engaging in mere argument, leaving the trial court with only one choice.
Accordingly, based on this record, I respectfully dissent and would affirm the lower courts.