Nellie Pierce v. Atlantic Richfield Company
Nellie Pierce v. Atlantic Richfield Company, 166 So. 3d 996 (La. 2015).
Cited by
- Heirs of Lydia Bergeron, Wife of/and Sidney J. Simoneaux Land Partnership, a Limited Partnership … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Tyson v. THOMPSON HOME HEALTH 79 So. 3d 246
Opinion text
Supreme Court of Louisiana
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE #013
FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
The Opinions handed down on the 17th day of March, 2015, are as follows:
PER CURIAM:
2014-C -1233 NELLIE PIERCE, ET AL. v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, ET AL.
(Parish of Vermilion)
Accordingly, the lower courts judgments are reversed, and the
case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
WEIMER, J., concurs, and assigns reasons.
GUIDRY, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
03/17/15
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
NO. 2014-C-1233
NELLIE PIERCE, ET AL.
VERSUS
ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL,
THIRD CIRCUIT, PARISH OF VERMILION
PER CURIAM
Because Eagle Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267, 10-2275,
10-2279, 10-2289 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So. 3d 246, addressed subsequent purchaser
rights following a sale, which are distinguishable from the rights acquired through a
succession transfer, we find Eagle Pipe is not dispositive of the exceptions of no right
of action filed by the defendants in this case. Accordingly, the lower court judgments
are reversed, and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings.1
1
Plaintiffs also included Nellie Pierce and Pierce Enterprises. The court of appeal concluded
“[i]t is undisputed that neither Mrs. Pierce nor Pierce Enterprises have any ownership interest in any
of the property at issue before the court.” The parties limited their arguments to the rights of the
Pierce children as “universal legatees.” Therefore, the rights of Nellie Pierce and Pierce Enterprises
are not at issue.
03/17/15
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
NO. 2014-C-1233
NELLIE PIERCE, ET AL.
VERSUS
ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT,
PARISH OF VERMILION
WEIMER, J., concurring.
I concur in the result. See Eagle Pipe and Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess
Corp., 10-2267, 10-2275, 10-2279, 10-2289 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So.3d 246 (Weimer,
J., dissenting at pp. 284-88, 291-93).
03/17/15
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2014-C-1233
NELLIE PIERCE, ET AL.
VERSUS
ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL
THIRD CIRCUIT, PARISH OF VERMILLION
GUIDRY, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
I concur in the result of our per curiam decision today. I write separately to
point out that our reversal of the lower courts’ rulings, because they relied on the
subsequent purchaser doctrine as applied in Eagle Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. Amerada
Hess Corp., 10-2267, 10-2275, 10-2279, 10-2289 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So.3d 246,
does not address the merits of any other basis for the defendants’ exceptions or
defenses, including extinguishment of the plaintiffs’ claims by confusion and
prescription or peremption.
1