Judgment rendered July 15, 2026. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P.
No. 56,931-CA
COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA
*****
REGIONS BANK, AS TRUSTEE Plaintiff-Appellee OF THE ANTRIM TRUST
versus
BROOKIE HUDSON WALKER, Defendants-Appellants CHARLES EWING, III AND CHARLOTTE HUDSON EWING
Appealed from the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Bossier, Louisiana Trial Court No. 171,045
Honorable Allen Parker Self, Jr., Judge
BROOKIE HUDSON WALKER In Proper Person, Appellant
CHARLES EWING, III In Proper Person, Appellant
CHARLOTTE HUDSON EWING In Proper Person, Appellant
KEAN MILLER, LLP Counsel for Appellee By: J. Mark Miller
Before COX, STEPHENS, and ELLENDER, JJ. ELLENDER, J.,
The defendants, three self-represented siblings, appeal the trial court’s
judgment granting Regions Bank, as the trustee of the Antrim Trust, a right
of passage across their family property. They ask this court to reverse,
arguing the selected location is not the shortest, least injurious route
available. For the following reasons, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Regions Bank (“Regions”) manages several pieces of property
belonging to the trust, including a 540-acre tract of land (“the Antrim 540”)
located in Bossier Parish, immediately north of a tract of land owned by the
defendants (“the Walker-Ewing tract”). Louisiana Highway 160 (“Hwy.
160”) is immediately south of the Walker-Ewing tract. Since at least the
1960s, timber has been harvested from the Antrim 540 and transported to
Hwy. 160 via a verbally granted right of passage through the western side of
the Walker-Ewing tract (later referred to as the “Western Route”). The same
passage has also been used by recreational hunting lessees to access the
Antrim 540.
In December 2022, after receiving information contractors hired by
Regions were using an alternate route across their property because the
Western Route was impassable, the defendants changed the locks on the gate
at the entrance of the Walker-Ewing tract from Hwy. 160, effectively cutting
off any access to or from the Antrim 540 via Hwy. 160. Because all prior
permission to use the Western Route was verbally given, Regions filed suit
against the defendants seeking a formal, recorded right of passage across the
Walker-Ewing tract which would provide access to Hwy. 160, allow timber from the Antrim 540 to be properly harvested, and allow for the recreational
hunting lessees to access the Antrim 540.
In its original petition, Regions claimed the Antrim 540 was an
involuntarily enclosed estate, and therefore entitled access to the nearest
public road; they suggested Hwy. 160 was the nearest public road. Regions
asked the trial court to grant it a right of passage through the eastern half of
the Walker-Ewing tract (later referred to as the “Eastern Route”). Though it
had never been used to harvest timber from the Antrim 540 before, Regions
claimed the Eastern Route followed an existing dirt path that passed solely
through the Walker-Ewing tract and allowed access to Hwy. 160.
The defendants acknowledged their father had given Regions verbal
permission to use the Western Route to transport timber from the Antrim
540. However, they argued that route was now impassable due to Regions’
failure to maintain it and, therefore, Regions lost its right to use the
previously granted servitude along the Western Route. Regions’ subsequent
use of the Eastern Route without permission was, they claimed, a poorly
disguised attempt to relocate the verbal right of passage previously granted
by their father. The defendants argued there was no reason for Regions to
traverse the Walker-Ewing tract to get to a public road because Regions
Bank had access to a public road from a separate 40-acre tract owned by the
Antrim Trust (the “Antrim 40”) and situated north of the Antrim 540. They
claimed the shortest and least injurious route to access the Antrim 540 was
via what became known as the Northern Route, which began at the Antrim
540, crossed a tract of land to the north owned by Ardis & Co. of Louisiana,
proceeded west across the Antrim 40, to the Coile Road, which the
defendants argued was in fact the closest public road. 2 The defendants attached several exhibits to their answer, including a
map they designated as being updated by the U.S. Department of
Transportation in 2012, and upon which they noted the Coile Road as a
public road meeting the boundary of the Antrim 40; a map they designated
as being created by the Bossier Parish Tax Assessor, which shows the Coile
Road meeting the Antrim 40, and which describes the Western Route as an
existing dirt road; a map they designated as being a U.S. Geological Survey
map created in 1924, which depicts the Western Route as an existing dirt
road; another map they designated as being a U.S. Geological Survey map
created in 1956 which shows the Coile Road meeting the Antrim 40, and
which describes the Western Route as an existing dirt road; a FEMA map
showing the Western Route as an existing dirt road; another map they
contend was created by the Bossier Parish Tax Assessor depicting the
Western Route as an existing dirt road; a Google satellite map depicting the
Western Route as an existing dirt road; what appears to be a survey map
contesting the location of the Western Route offered by Regions; a police
report made to the Bossier Parish Sheriff on November 29, 2022; a
handwritten note from Sean McKay with Regions dated December 1, 2022;
and several photographs of the Western Route the defendants labeled as
being of the “existing dirt road.”
Regions then filed an amended petition. They re-urged their original
request for a right of passage across the Eastern Route, but also offered the
Western Route as an alternative. The Western Route was the logging road
historically used to harvest timber from the Antrim 540; it traversed the
Walker-Ewing tract, property owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
and again the Walker-Ewing tract, before meeting Hwy. 160. Regions 3 expressed a preference for a right of passage along the Eastern Route, but
agreed either route would be sufficient to allow for the harvest of timber
from that property, as well as to allow hunting lessees to access the Antrim
540.
The defendants answered the amended petition, arguing again the
Antrim 540 was not an enclosed estate due to its use of the Coile Road to
access the Antrim 40. They contested Regions’ description of the Eastern
Route as an already existing dirt road; any path that might be present along
the Eastern Route was the result of Regions’ repeated trespassing and not the
result of the defendants’ attempt to build a road of any sort. The defendants
argued the so-called route was just a space between rows of planted trees
and through the yard of their ancestral home place. The only road on the
Walker-Ewing tract would be the Western Route, which Regions failed to
maintain. The defendants acknowledged the Western Route’s historic use to
harvest timber from the Antrim 540, which they stated had been the case for
over 100 years, with the most recent use occurring in December 2022; they
were also aware of the recreational hunting lessees who used the Western
Route.
TRIAL
The matter proceeded to trial. Regions called several witnesses, the
first of whom was Charles Coyle, III, a professional land surveyor, who
inspected the Eastern, Western, and Northern Routes. Photographs of the
various routes were introduced into evidence, along with several maps
showing the location of the Antrim 540, the Walker-Ewing tract, Hwy. 160,
the proposed routes for the right of passage, and the Antrim 40. Survey
maps created by Coyle of the Eastern and Western Routes were also entered 4 into evidence. While both routes depicted were approximately the same
length, the Western Route traversed only about 727 feet of the Walker-
Ewing tract (the remaining 645 feet or so of the route crossed property
owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), while the Eastern Route
traversed approximately 1,462 feet of the Walker-Ewing tract.
Coyle concluded the Western and Eastern Routes would be suitable to
allow Regions to harvest timber from the Antrim 540. The Northern Route,
however, was problematic because it did not actually access a public road.
Coyle’s inspection of the Northern Route began at the Emma Cemetery
Road, and proceeded down the Coile Road toward the Antrim 40. On the
Coile Road, a little over a mile from the Emma Cemetery Road, Coyle found
a gate and a “Parish Maintenance Ends Here” sign. Beyond the gate, which
he stated blocked the use of the Coile Road, was a dirt path which eventually
met the boundary of the Antrim 40. In Coyle’s opinion, the portion of the
Coile Road situated behind the gate was not maintained by the parish and
not a public road. Coyle estimated the distance between the gate and the
Antrim 40 to be approximately 4,400 feet. Because the Antrim 40 and the
Antrim 540 were not adjacent tracts of land, Regions would need to obtain a
servitude from a landowner adjacent to both the Antrim 40 and the Antrim
540, as well as a servitude from Weyerhaeuser Forest Holdings to traverse
the land between the Antrim 40 to the gate on the Coile Road.
Sean McKay, Senior Forester and Vice President of Regions, testified
he obtained permission to use the Western Route decades prior from the
defendants’ father, Billy Hudson. McKay stated his records indicated timber
had been harvested from the Antrim 540 using the Western Route since the
1960s, though he agreed with the defendants the route had probably been 5 used for at least 100 years. McKay testified the Antrim 540 was used for
timber production and also leased to a hunting club for wildlife management
purposes. McKay stated the hunters accessed the land seasonally, and his
contractors needed access to the Antrim 540 a few times each year, noting
the Western Route was not passable during the winter months due to its low-
lying nature.
When asked what led to Regions filing for a formal, recorded right of
passage, McKay testified that in late 2022, some site work was being done
on the Antrim 540. McKay was notified by Joseph Walker, the defendant
Brookie Walker’s husband, that contractors working for Regions were using
the Eastern Route without permission and had damaged the property.
McKay went to meet with Joseph Walker at the Walker-Ewing tract, where
for the first time, McKay noticed the path referred to as the Eastern Route;
he also noticed a tree had fallen across the Western Route, making it
impassable. McKay supposed his contractors were using the Eastern Route
because of the fallen tree. Walker asked McKay about Regions paying the
defendants for past and future use of the Western Route, and McKay told
him there would be no payments for past use, while future use would need to
be negotiated.
While McKay hoped his meeting with Walker would allow Regions,
its contractors, and its hunting lessees to continue using the Western Route
to access the Antrim 540, it did not. In addition to changing the locks on the
gate at the entry of the Walker-Ewing tract off Hwy. 160, the defendants
blocked access to both routes at the northern boundary of the Walker-Ewing
tract, placing T-bars into the ground. As a result, Regions, its contractors,
and its hunting lessees were left unable to access the Antrim 540. McKay 6 testified he would have cleared the tree from the Western Route if Regions
had access to the Walker-Ewing tract, but because he had been unable to
access the Antrim 540 since December 2022, nothing had been done to make
the Western Route passable or to repair whatever damage his contractors
may have done to the Eastern Route. McKay acknowledged very minimal
site work would be required to make the Western Route passable again for
purposes of harvesting timber.
Mary Melissa Brantley testified via trial deposition as an expert in real
estate abstract work. She established the chain of title to the Antrim 540,
and she confirmed that, according to the conveyance records of Bossier
Parish, the owners of the Antrim 540 had at no point voluntarily landlocked
themselves. Brantley’s testimony was entered into evidence without
objection; despite being given an opportunity to question Brantley at the
deposition, the defendants asked her no questions.
Joseph Walker then testified on behalf of the defendants. He said he
was familiar with the Antrim 540, and he acknowledged timber had been
harvested from the Antrim 540 via the Western Route for probably 100
years. He believed the Coile Road was the closest public road to property
owned by the Antrim Trust based on a map of Bossier Parish Police Jury
District 12, which he stated depicted the entirety of the Coile Road as a
public road, including the portion not maintained by the parish. On cross-
examination, it was revealed Walker himself wrote the words “public road”
on the maps it attached to its answer as proof of the Coile Road’s public
designation; the words “public road” were not printed by the authors of any
of the maps depicting the Coile Road.
7 Though several exhibits, including maps and photographs, were
referred to by the defendants when they questioned the witnesses, none of
those items appear to have been entered into evidence. However, a review
of the record indicates most of the maps and photographs referred to by the
defendants were entered into evidence by Regions during the presentation of
its case.
Ultimately, the trial court granted Regions a servitude across the
Western Route. In its written opinion dated July 10, 2025, the court found
the Antrim 540 to be an enclosed estate. It determined the enclosure of the
property was not voluntary, and Regions was entitled to a right of passage
from the Antrim 540 to the nearest public roadway. The trial court found
Hwy. 160 was the nearest public road. It found the Coile Road was public
where it was maintained by the parish, and that the parish maintenance
terminated at the gate; the dirt path behind the gate, which was not
maintained by the parish and was inaccessible to the public, was not a public
road. As the dirt path beyond the gate was not a public road, the trial court
found there was no actual access from the Antrim 40 to a public road. The
court further determined the appropriate right of passage for the Antrim 540
would involve traversing the Walker-Ewing tract, and it found the shortest
and least injurious servitude was the Western Route, which had historically
been used by Regions with permission from the prior landowner. Regions
was ordered to prepare a judgment in accordance with the trial court’s
opinion.
Prior to the filing of the signed judgment, the defendants prematurely
filed a notice of appeal and a motion to reconsider. The signed judgment
was filed shortly thereafter, and granted Regions, as trustee of the Antrim 8 Trust, a servitude along the Western Route, between the Antrim 540 and
Hwy. 160, for the purpose of harvesting timber. The judgment also allowed
hunting lessees who used the Antrim 540 to utilize the Western Route to
access their leases. The defendants then filed a motion for new trial, which
the trial court denied, and another request for a devolutive appeal, which the
trial court granted.
ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES
In their first assignment of error, the defendants argue the trial court
erred in allowing Regions to dictate the location of the right of passage and
failed to consider other neighboring tracts of land as possible estates that
could be burdened by the right of passage sought by Regions.
In their second assignment of error, the defendants argue the court
failed to impose the access servitude on the estate providing the shortest and
most practical route to a public road, in accordance with La. C.C. art. 692;
the Northern Route provides the shortest and least injurious route for access
to a public road.
In their third assignment of error, the defendants contend the trial
court erred in finding the portion of the Coile Road from the gate to the
boundary of the Antrim 40 was not a public road because no evidence was
submitted to support such a finding.
In their fourth assignment of error, the defendants argue the trial court
erred in determining the Coile Road was unsuitable for traffic reasonably
necessary for the use of the Antrim 540. They argue the portion of the Coile
Road beyond the “Parish Maintenance Ends Here” sign is a well-maintained,
wide dirt road, free of ruts and standing water. The defendants also argue
9 Regions Bank admitted to using the Coile Road to access the Antrim 40 in
the past, making it suitable to harvest timber from the Antrim 540.
In their fifth assignment of error, the defendants contend the trial court
erred in granting a right of passage on a route that was “impassable due to its
low-lying nature” during the winter months. They argued the most
appropriate route would allow for year-round access.
In their sixth assignment of error, the defendants argue the trial court
erred in admitting the chain of title and related testimony given by Mary
Melissa Brantley concerning whether the Antrim 540 was voluntarily
landlocked. The defendants contend Brantley’s review of the Antrim 540
only included a 140-acre portion of the 546-acre tract, and they argue the
trial court should not have considered Brantley’s testimony because it was
based on this incomplete review of the property records.
In their seventh assignment of error, because Regions asserted the
Antrim Trust’s ownership of only 140 acres in its original petition, the
defendants argue the trial court erred when it rendered a judgment
referencing approximately 546 acres owned by the Antrim Trust.
In their eighth assignment of error, the defendants argue the trial court
erred in allowing “recreational hunting leases” to be included in the
judgment because the trial court’s written opinion did not contain any such
language.
The defendants ask this court to reverse the trial court’s judgment
granting Regions, as trustee for the Antrim Trust, a legal right of passage
across the Walker-Ewing property via the Western Route.
Regions contends, after considering the Eastern, Western, and
Northern Routes, the trial court properly selected the Western Route as the 10 shortest and least injurious location for its right of passage. It asks this court
to affirm the trial court’s judgment granting Regions, as trustee of the
Antrim Trust, a right of passage along the Western Route.
DISCUSSION
Assignment of Error No. 1
It is well-settled that the owner of an involuntarily enclosed estate
with no access to a public road may claim a right of passage over
neighboring property to the nearest public road. La. C.C. art. 689(A). The
owner of the enclosed estate may not demand the location of the passage
anywhere he chooses; rather, the passage from the enclosed estate to the
public road generally shall be taken along the shortest route that is the least
injurious to the intervening lands. La. C.C. art. 692. With that said, the
circumstances of each case determine the location of the servitude.
Blackjack Farms, L.L.C. v. Richmond, 53,986 (La. App. 2 Cir. 6/30/21), 324
So. 3d 726, writ denied, 21-01119 (La. 11/10/21), 326 So. 3d 1246, citing
Phillips Energy Partners, LLC v. Milton Crow Ltd. P’ship, 49,791 (La. App.
2 Cir. 5/20/15), 166 So. 3d 428, writ denied, 15-1396 (La. 10/2/15), 186 So.
3d 1148. While courts typically grant a right of passage least injurious to the
servient estate, the location is not left up to the option of the party who must
grant the servitude; other factors, such as distance, degree of injury to the
servient estate, practicability, and cost all weigh in the decision of where to
locate the right of passage. Id.
The trial court was presented with two possible routes for the
servitude by Regions, and the defendants proposed a third route for the
court’s consideration. After hearing testimony and evidence concerning all
three routes, the trial court chose the Western Route. McKay’s testimony 11 established the work and cost involved to repair the currently impassable
Western Route would be minimal. Further, the Western Route was clearly
suitable for the needs of Regions and the hunters who leased the Antrim 540;
McKay testified he obtained verbal permission to use the Western Route
several decades prior from Billy Hudson, and Walker himself admitted the
Western Route had probably been in use for at least 100 years to harvest
timber from the Antrim 540. In addition to being a well-established route,
the Western Route also traversed the smallest amount of the Walker-Ewing
tract. Based on the record, we cannot say the trial court erred in finding the
Western Route to be the most appropriate location for the right of passage
requested by Regions.
Assignments of Error Nos. 2, 3, and 4
The defendants argue the trial court erred in finding the Coile Road
was not a public road, and in determining the Coile Road unsuitable for the
kind of traffic reasonably necessary for the use of the Antrim 540. They also
argue the trial court erred in granting the servitude along the Western Route
because a shorter, less injurious route with access to a public road, the
Northern Route, was available. Because these assignments center around
the defendants’ clear disagreement with the trial court’s finding the Coile
Road was not a public road beyond the locked gate and the “Parish
Maintenance Ends Here” signage, we will consider them together.
A road may be either public or private. A public road is one that is
subject to public use. The public may own the land on which the road is
built or merely have the right to use it. A private road is one that is not
subject to public use. La. C.C. art. 457. A public highway, street, or road is
any place that is (1) open to vehicular traffic by members of the general 12 public, even if the public is unlikely to use the road except to go to a
particular place, and (2) maintained by the public. Phipps v. Schupp, 09-
2037 (La. 7/6/10), 45 So. 3d 593; Bardfield v. New Orleans Pub. Belt R. R.,
371 So. 2d 783 (La. 1979); Kavanagh v. Bowers, 02-248 (La. App. 5 Cir.
6/26/02), 826 So. 2d 1165, writ denied, 02-2086 (La. 11/1/02), 828 So. 2d
575.
The Coile Road is very clearly a public road up to the gate and “Parish
Maintenance Ends Here” sign. However, in considering whether the land
beyond the gate, which prevents the general public from accessing the dirt
path beyond it, is public, we find no evidence offered by the defendants
sufficient to rebut that offered by Regions to show the portion of the Coile
Road beyond the gate is private property and not a public road. The
presence of a locked gate prevents the public from accessing that portion of
the Coile Road beyond it. Further, the parish very clearly does not maintain
the Coile Road beyond the sign it placed marking the end of its maintenance.
Pursuant to La. C.C. art. 457, and considering the holding in Phipps, we
cannot find the trial court erred in finding the Coile Road was a public road
only between the Emma Cemetery Road and the gate.
We now turn to whether the trial court erred in ignoring a shorter, less
injurious route. The defendants’ assertion the Northern Route is the shortest
and least injurious ignores the obvious: the Northern Route is only the
shortest and least injurious route to the defendants. However, if the
Northern Route were selected by the court, Ardis & Co. would have to grant
a right of passage between the Antrim 540 and the Antrim 40, which would
require the costly construction of an entirely new road across its property.
Further, Weyerhaeuser Forest Holdings would have to give Regions a 13 servitude to access the Coile Road from the Antrim 40, which would also
require substantial construction. The Eastern Route presents a similar
challenge as it has not been used previously to facilitate the harvest of
timber. The Western Route, however, crosses the shortest amount of any
private landowner’s property, and it burdens only 762 feet of the Walker-
Ewing tract. Further, because the Western Route follows an established and
apparent servitude which has allowed for the harvest of timber from the
Antrim 540 for at least 100 years, minimal site work would be required to
make it passable once again. We find no support in the record for the
defendants’ claim the trial court failed to select the shortest, least injurious
Assignment of Error No. 5
While the defendants contend the Western Route cannot be the proper
choice for a right of passage due to its seasonally restricted use, the law
requires a right of passage for the benefit of an enclosed estate be suitable
only for the kind of traffic reasonably necessary for the use of that estate.
La. C.C. art. 690. The Western Route has been used for harvesting timber
from the Antrim 540 for several decades. Furthermore, hunters leasing the
Antrim 540 used the Western Route seasonally to access their hunting leases
for years prior. As there is no indication Regions required year-round, all-
weather access to the Antrim 540, which would be far beyond the access
previously needed and used, we see no error in the trial court deeming the
Western Route suitable for the kind of traffic necessary for the use of the
14 Assignment of Error No. 6
While the defendants contend the trial court erred in admitting as
evidence a chain of title and testimony of Mary Melissa Brantley that failed
to encompass the entire Antrim 540 property, a review of the record reveals
Brantley’s trial deposition was admitted into evidence without objection. In
order to preserve an issue for appeal, a party must make a timely objection
and state the specific ground for the objection. La. C.E. art. 103(A)(1); La.
C.C.P. art. 1635; Martin v. Martin, 44,020 (La. App. 2 Cir. 12/3/08), 3 So.
3d 512. In addition to making a contemporaneous objection, the reasons for
the objection must be brought to the trial court’s attention, allowing the trial
court to make the proper ruling and prevent or cure any error. Id. Failure to
contemporaneously object constitutes a waiver of the right to complain on
appeal. Id. When the defendants failed to object to the admission of
Brantley’s trial deposition into evidence, they waived their right to ask this
court to consider any issues they may have had with the trial court’s
consideration of that testimony. However, even if the defendants had
properly objected to her testimony, Brantley’s qualification as an expert in
real estate abstract work appears appropriate based on her professional
experience.
Assignment of Error No. 7 and 8
The defendants argue the legal description of the enclosed estate in
the final judgment is erroneous because it is inconsistent with that contained
in Regions’ original petition. In their final assignment, they contend the trial
court erred in including the words “recreational hunting leases” in the
judgment, despite not addressing those in its written opinion.
15 Regions petitioned the court for a right of passage from the Antrim
540 to Hwy. 160. While the original petition discussed only the acreage
affected by the proposed right of passage, throughout these proceedings, all
parties acknowledged the Antrim 540 was a tract of land measuring
approximately 540 acres, more or less, situated north of the Walker-Ewing
tract. There is no error in the trial court’s inclusion of an accurate legal
description of the Antrim 540 in its final judgment.
The defendants contend the trial court should not have included
recreational hunting lessees as persons authorized to use the right of passage
granted to Regions because there was no discussion of the recreational
hunting lessees in the court’s written opinion. While the written opinion did
not discuss the recreational hunting lessees specifically, whether the hunting
lessees were specifically discussed in the written opinion giving reasons for
judgment is immaterial. It is well-settled that the trial court’s oral or written
reasons for judgment form no part of the judgment; appellate courts review
judgments, not reasons for judgment. Woodard v. Brookshire Grocery Co.,
54,574 (La. App. 2 Cir. 8/10/22), 345 So. 3d 439, writ denied, 22-01360 (La.
11/16/22), 349 So. 3d 1001.
In this case, Regions asked for a right of passage for itself, its
contractors, and its recreational hunting lessees. After hearing evidence and
argument from both parties, the trial court granted the relief requested by
Regions. The defendants presented no evidence at trial to rebut McKay’s
testimony offered in support of Regions’ request for a right of passage,
which he stated was to facilitate the harvest of timber and wildlife
management on the Antrim 540. As such, we can find no error in the trial
court’s judgment granting recreational hunting lessees the use of the right of 16 passage along the Western Route to obtain access to the Antrim 540 from
Hwy. 160.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the trial court’s judgment
granting Regions Bank, as the trustee of the Antrim Trust, a right of passage
through the Walker-Ewing tract along the Western Route. All costs are to
be paid by the defendants.
AFFIRMED.