State ex rel. Board of Com'rs of Buras Levee Dist. v. N. A. Baker & Son

83 So. 693, 146 La. 413, 1920 La. LEXIS 1749
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedJanuary 5, 1920
DocketNo. 23572
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 83 So. 693 (State ex rel. Board of Com'rs of Buras Levee Dist. v. N. A. Baker & Son) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Board of Com'rs of Buras Levee Dist. v. N. A. Baker & Son, 83 So. 693, 146 La. 413, 1920 La. LEXIS 1749 (La. 1920).

Opinion

DAWKINS, J.

This is a proceeding by mandamus to compel the erasure from the records by the clerk and ex officio recorder of Plaquemines parish of a certain contract between the plaintiff and the defendant N. A. Baker & Son which it is claimed operates as un incumbrance upon certain real property. The clerk, N. A. Baker & Son, the original party to the contract with plaintiff, and the Wisner Estates, Incorporated, to whom Baker & Son had transferred their rights, were all made parties defendant in the rule.

Defendant Wisner Estates, Incorporated, appeared in response to the rule, and first [415]*415excepted to the proceeding on the ground that the petition disclosed no right or cause of action and no right to institute this action by mandamus. It then answered in the alternative the various allegations of the petition, and prayed that plaintiffs demands be rejected, and in the alternative for judgment in the sum of $2,600, which it averred had been paid under the terms of the contract to the plaintiff.

There was judgnfent below in favor of the plaintiff overruling and dismissing defendants’ exceptions, and making the writ of mandamus peremptory, and directing the cancellation and erasure of the contract from the records of Plaquemines parish, and also rejecting defendants’ reconventional demand.

Defendant Wisner Estates, Incorporated, has appealed.

Opinion.

The first question which confronts us on the threshold of this case is as to the right to proceed by mandamus. The contract and two reinscriptions which it is sought to cancel by this proceeding read as follows:

“No. 14. Contract between Buras Levee District and N. A. Baker & Sons.
“United States of America, State of Louisiana, City of New Orleans.
“Be it known that on this twenty-ninth day of the month of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred ari'd eight (1908), and of the independence of the United States of America the one hundred and thirty-second (132d), before me, Alvin Edward Hebert, a notary public duly commissioned and qualified in and for this city and the parish of Orleans, therein residing, and in the presence of the witnesses hereinafter named and undersigned, personally came and appeared John Bernard Easterling, president, herein appearing for and in behalf of the board of commissioners for the Buras levee district, a political corporation created by Act No. 18 of the General Assembly of the state of Louisiana for the year of 1894, herein appearing by virtue of a resolution of the board of commissioners of said district adopted at its meeting held at Buras, La., on Thursday, February-18, 1908, a certified copy whereof is hereto annexed, who declared unto me, notary, that the said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district does by these' presents covenant, agree, stipulate, and bind itself to hereafter sell, transfer, set over, assign all of its rights, titles, and interest which it may acquire from the United States government and the state of Louisiana in and to all the lands situated in the state of Louisiana in T. 18 and 20 S., R. 25 E., T. 19, 20, and 21 S., R. 26 E., T. 20 and 21 S., range 27 E., S. E. district of Louisiana west of river, and hereafter to be acquired by the said board from the United States government and the state of Louisiana, except as hereafter specified, unto N. A. Baker & Sons, commercial firm composed of Nelson A. Baker, Earle It. Baker, and Millard O. Baker, doing business and domiciled at New Orleans, La., and herein represented by Millard O. Baker, acting for and on behalf of N. A. Baker & Sons, here present agreeing, stipulating, covenanting with the board of commissioners for the Buras levee district under the following terms and conditions, to wit:
“The said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district hereby agree to sell, transfer, set over, assign all the rights and titles which it may acquire in and to the above-described lands unto the said N. A. Baker & Sons at the price and sum of 25 cents per acre (twenty-five), conditioned as follows: At the time of signing these presents the said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district does hereby receive and acknowledge the receipt hereof from the said N. A. Baker & Sons of the sum of one thousand ($1,000.00) dollars cash due,’ acquittance and discharge for which is hereby granted as deposit to bind the said N. A. Baker & Sons to its obligation under this contract. The said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district shall receive from N. A. Baker & Sons, and the said N. A. Baker & Sons does hereby obligate itself to pay the said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district, the further sum of one thousand five hundred ($1,500.00) dollars cash within sixty (60) days after the signing of these presents as a further deposit to secure the performance by the said N. A. Baker & Sons of its obligation under this contract, and the said N. A. Baker & Sons does hereby obligate itself to receive and accept title to and to pay the purchase price of any or all of said lands within six (6) months after the said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district shall have tendered to the said N. A. Baker & Sons the proper deed and abstract showing clear title and ownership of all or any part of the said lands by the said board of commissioners for the Buras levee [417]*417district. It is agreed between tlie board of commissioners for the Buras levee district and the said N. A. Baker & Sons that, in the event that the board of commissioners for the Buras levee district should fail to recover and have vested in itself within two (2) years from this date titles to sufficient land to cover, the cash paid upon this contract, the difference between the said amount deposited and paid to the board of commissioners for the Buras levee district and the purchase price of the lands on the basis of twenty-five (25$) cents per acre, title to which shall be vested in the board of commissioners for the Buras levee district, and tendered to N. A. Baker & Sons, shall be returned to the said N.' A. Baker & Sons, and this contract terminated. It is further agreed and stipulated that this contract is to exist and hold good for a period of two (2) years from the date hereof, and should the said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district fail within said term to recover all of the lands which it is possible for the said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district to recover, it shall be optional with the said N. A. Baker & Sons to ask and receive a further extension of two (2) years’ time under the same terms and conditions.
“The deed of sale of said lands so acquired by the board of commissioners for the Buras levee district is to be made in favor of N. A. Baker & Sons, or any party they may designate, the privilege being granted to the said N. A. Baker & Sons and accepted by them of making contracts for the sale of any portion of these lands at any time during the existence and under the terms of this contract. The said board of commissioners for the Buras levee district hereby obligates itself to execute deeds and transfers of lands at the request of the said N. A. Baker & Sons in accordance with all properly recorded contracts made by the said N. A. Baker & Sons with third parties not contrary to the terms of the agreement.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Rectangle Ranche Co. v. Board of Com'rs
89 F. Supp. 759 (E.D. Louisiana, 1950)
Waterman v. Tidewater Associated Oil Co.
35 So. 2d 225 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1947)
State v. Sinclair Refining Co.
25 So. 2d 543 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1946)
State Ex Rel. Hymel's Heirs v. Johness, Inc.
198 So. 890 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1940)
State Ex Rel. Violet Trapping Co. v. Grace
162 So. 26 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1935)
Leatherman v. Schwab
124 So. 459 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
83 So. 693, 146 La. 413, 1920 La. LEXIS 1749, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-board-of-comrs-of-buras-levee-dist-v-n-a-baker-son-la-1920.