M & a FARMS, LTD. v. Town of Ville Platte
This text of 422 So. 2d 708 (M & a FARMS, LTD. v. Town of Ville Platte) 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
M & A FARMS, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TOWN OF VILLE PLATTE, et al., Defendant-Appellant.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
*710 Fusilier, Pucheu & Soileau, A. Gaynor Soileau, Ville Platte, for defendant-appellant.
Preston N. Aucoin, Ville Platte, for plaintiff-appellee.
Dubuisson & Dubuisson, Edward B. Dubuisson, Opelousas, J. Wendel Fusilier, Ville Platte, Guglielmo & Lopez, Peter Caviness, Opelousas, for defendant-appellee-appellant.
Before DOUCET, LABORDE and YELVERTON, JJ.
YELVERTON, Judge.
M & A Farms, Ltd. (M & A) filed this suit against the Town of Ville Platte to recover damages for a trespass and for a mandatory injunction to correct the damage to a levee. The town answered and filed a third party demand for contract indemnification against Dodge Construction Company (Dodge), the town's contractor on a construction project. Dodge in turn filed a third party demand based on negligence and/or fault against Paul N. Fontenot and/or Paul N. Fontenot, Inc., the engineer for the project, and his or its insurer. After trial on the merits, the district court rendered judgment in favor of M & A and against the Town of Ville Platte for damages totalling $7,033 plus $5 a day from the date of the trespass until the property is restored to its former condition, and also granted a mandatory injunction ordering the Town to restore the property to its former condition within 90 days from final judgment. The district court further granted judgment in favor of the Town of Ville Platte on its third party demand against Dodge, and also granted Dodge a judgment on its third party demand against Paul Fontenot and/or Paul Fontenot, Inc. and his or its insurer. The Town of Ville Platte, Dodge Construction Company, Paul Fontenot and/or Paul N. Fontenot, Inc. and the latter's insurer have all appealed. M & A answered the appeal seeking an increase in the award of damages.
The facts of this case are relatively simple. The Town of Ville Platte employed Paul N. Fontenot to draw up plans and specifications for the resurfacing of certain streets and other related improvements. The contract also required that Paul N. Fontenot provide all engineering services for the project including the inspection and supervision of the construction. Dodge was awarded the construction contract. Under its contract Dodge was required to take orders and directions from the engineer.
Included in the construction project were plans for improvements along Hickory Street. The street for a distance of 986 feet bounded the northern side of property belonging to M & A. The plans provided for the construction of sidewalks on the south side of Hickory Street. The sidewalks were to be laid on M & A's property. The town never obtained a written right of way from M & A.
A levee ran along the north edge of M & A's property parallel to Hickory Street. The levee occupied the area designated by the construction plans for the building of the sidewalk. On October 10, 1979 Douglas Fontenot, the designated job site inspector for Paul N. Fontenot, instructed Dodge to level the levee and utilize the dirt to fill in the roadside ditch lying between the street and the levee. After this was done Clem Morein, the sole stockholder and president of M & A Farms, Ltd., discovered the equipment on his property and ordered the construction crew out. The sidewalk was never constructed and the present lawsuit followed.
*711 The issues presented by these appeals are whether the trial court erred:
1) In finding that the town committed a trespass;
2) In the award of damages;
3) In issuing the mandatory injunction;
4) In finding Dodge liable under its contract with the town for damages;
5) In finding Paul Fontenot and/or Paul Fontenot, Inc. negligent and/or at fault in causing Dodge to trespass upon M & A's property.
We will discuss these issues under the headings 1. Trespass, 2. Quantum, 3. The Mandatory Injunction, and 4. Ville Platte's Third Party Demand.
TRESPASS
To constitute a trespass there must be an unlawful physical invasion of the property or possession of another. Gliptis v. Fifteen Oil Company, 204 La. 896, 16 So.2d 471 (La.1943); and Patin v. Stockstill, 315 So.2d 868 (La.App. 1st Cir.1975).
Dodge's construction crew bulldozed the levee down on direct orders from Douglas Fontenot, the on-the-job inspector for the Town's engineer. The Town had a right of way for Hickory Street but the levee was outside this right of way. Although the needed right of way had been discussed with Clem Morein, M & A's president and the sole stockholder, none was ever granted. The trial court was correct in finding that the entry onto plaintiff's property constituted an actionable trespass.
Likewise, the trial court was correct in concluding that the Town was vicariously liable for the actions of its engineer and the latter's employees since they were hired to supervise and direct the job, and were acting for the Town when they ordered the trespass. La.Civ.Code art. 2320.
QUANTUM
The Town of Ville Platte complains that the damages awarded were neither proved nor authorized by law. The plaintiff answered the appeal seeking an increase.
The trial court awarded plaintiff $4,000 for the trespass, $3,000 for the property damage, $33 for the crop damage, and $5 a day for the continuing trespass.
In Louisiana only compensatory and not punitive or exemplary damages are recoverable for injury done to property. Bentley v. Industrial Fire Protection Company, 338 So.2d 1177 (La.App. 2nd Cir.1976). In the assessment of damages arising out of trespass the trial court has much discretion, but the damage must be certain and the discretion exercised only to the extent of the damage and ascertained from all the facts and circumstances. Ibid.
In the present case the plaintiff showed that it suffered property damage by the destruction and removal of the levee. The levee was 986 feet long, approximately two to three feet high and four to five feet wide. This dirt was taken off M & A's property and used to fill the ditch within the Town's right of way. We cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding $3,000 for this damage to plaintiff's property, and find that award to be appropriate.
The same observation can be made regarding the award of $33 for the damage to the bean crop.
The $4,000 award for the trespass was evidently intended by the trial court as an award for mental anguish suffered as a result of the trespass, since no other damages may be inferred from the acts. We find the trial court erred in this award. Plaintiff is a corporation. A corporate plaintiff cannot experience mental anguish. See Wendorf v. Corley, 394 So.2d 1252 (La. App. 3rd Cir.1980).
We also find that the trial court erred in awarding $5 a day from the date of the trespass until the property is returned to its former condition. The trespass in this case did not constitute a continuing trespass.
A continuing trespass occurs where the defendant erects a structure or places an object upon the land of the plaintiff and fails to remove it. The trespass continues *712
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
422 So. 2d 708, 1982 La. App. LEXIS 8396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/m-a-farms-ltd-v-town-of-ville-platte-lactapp-1982.