Ipf22, LLC v. Joyce Frazier
This text of Ipf22, LLC v. Joyce Frazier (Ipf22, LLC v. Joyce Frazier) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IPF22, LLC * NO. 2024-CA-0772
VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL
JOYCE FRAZIER * FOURTH CIRCUIT
* STATE OF LOUISIANA
*
* *******
JCL LOBRANO, J., CONCURS WITH REASONS
I respectfully concur in the results. I agree with the majority that, under our
controlling precedent in Sholes v. IPF22, LLC, 24-0552 (La. App. 4 Cir. 4/3/25), --
- So.3d ----, 2025 WL 999957, a reconventional demand seeking to annul a tax sale
based on a redemption nullity is governed by La. R.S. 47:2287, not the ten-day
answer period of La. R.S. 47:2266(B). The timeline provided by La. C.C.P. art.
1041, ninety days from service, is the appropriate procedural measure.
I write separately to stress that the ongoing invocation of La. R.S.
47:2266(B) as a peremptive bar, rather than an answer deadline, continues to cause
confusion at the trial level. When property rights are at stake, statutory precision
and procedural clarity are critical. The Legislature may wish to revisit these
provisions to explicitly distinguish answer deadlines from peremptive limits,
especially where constitutional notice rights are involved.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ipf22, LLC v. Joyce Frazier, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ipf22-llc-v-joyce-frazier-lactapp-2025.