Vs. Bryan K. Kuhn

FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE #053
FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
The Opinions handed down on the 9th day of December, 2022 are as follows:
BY Hughes, J.:
NAR SOLUTIONS, INC.2022-C-00425 VS. BRYAN K. KUHN (Parish of Jefferson)
REVERSED. DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT REINSTATED. SEE
OPINION.

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2022-C-00425
NAR SOLUTIONS, INC.
VERSUS
BRYAN K. KUHN
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL,
FIFTH CIRCUIT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON
HUGHES, J.
At issue in this matter is an action to quiet title following the tax sale of a
parcel of immovable property . Although the district court rendered judgment in
favor of the plaintiff, the appellate court held t hat the plaintiff failed to establish a
prima facie case that proper notice of sale was provided to some of the
defendant/property owner ’s ancestors-in-title, and the district court’s default
judgment against the defendant was vacated. For the reasons that follow, we reverse
and reinstate the district court judgment upholding the tax sale.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The subject residential property was inherited by siblings, Tracey Kuhn
Arvanitis, Deborah Kuhn Boudreaux, Henry Kuhn III, and Bryan Kuhn, upon the
death of their parents, Henry J. Kuhn, Jr. and Shirley Miller. In 2009, Bryan acquired
the twenty-five percent interest of Tracey, making Bryan a fifty percent owner with
Deborah and Henry, who each owned a twenty-five percent interest.
In 2015 , a tax sale title to the subject immovable property was sold for
$13,047.76, in payment of delinquent ad valorem taxes and related interest and costs
for the 2010 through 2014 tax years, to Mark Laughlin, and a tax sale certificate was

2

recorded in the parish conveyance records on August 12, 2015. Thereafter, Deborah
and Henry donated their respective interests in the property to Bryan in August of
2019.
Plaintiff, NAR Solutions, Inc. (“ NARS”), acquired the tax sale title to the
property via a quitclaim deed from Mark Laughlin on November 20, 2019 and, on
January 10, 2020, NARS filed a Petition to Confirm and Quiet Tax Sale Title and
for Declaratory Judgment in the 24th Judicial District Court for Jefferson Parish.
NARS attached a certified copy of the August 201 5 tax sale certificate.1 Personal
service of the 2020 petition was made on Bryan Kuhn (who had a 100% ownership
interest in the property at that time) on January 13, 2020.
On July 27, 2020 the Jefferson Parish Clerk of Court certified that no answer
or other pleadings had been filed in the matter (see NAR Solutions, Inc. v. Kuhn,
21-0256, p. 3 (La. App. 5 Cir. 1/26/22), ___ So.3d ___, ___ (2022 WL 225014 at *
3)), and a motion for entry of preliminary default was filed on July 28, 2020 . A
preliminary default was entered against Bryan Kuhn on July 28, 2020. A motion to
confirm the preliminary default was filed on August 10, 2020 , with the following
additional exhibits: an affidavit by NARS counsel Mark Boudreau, detailing his
efforts in searching for interested parties relative to the property; a judgment of
possession in the Succession of Shirley Miller; a judgment of possession in the
Succession of Henry J. Kuhn, Jr.; an October 2009 cash sale conveying the twenty-
five percent interest in the subject property of Tracey to Bryan; a n August 2019
donation to Bryan of the twenty-five percent interests of both Henry and Deborah; a
November 2019 quitclaim deed from Mark Laughlin to NARS of the tax sale title
previously acquired in the tax sale of the subject property; a January 2020 sheriff’s

1 The tax sale certificate stated, in pertinent part, that the tax collector had “mailed and published
the notice required by law” and had “strictly complied with each and every requirement of the law
relating to delinquent taxes, tax debtors, and to seizure s, advertisements, and sale of tax sale title
to the property in full….”

3

return reflecting citation and personal service on Bryan of the NARS petition to quiet
title and for declaratory relief; and an August 2020 affidavit by NARS secretary and
director Theresa Laughlin detailing NARS’ purchase of the property interest
obtained through th e August 2015 tax sale certificate . The record was also
supplemented with the filing of an updated affidavit by Theresa Laughlin, a copy of
the quitclaim deed by Mark Laughlin to NARS, and do cuments related to a
subsequent tax sale unrelated to the matter before this court.2
Following a January 6, 2021 hearing before the district court, a final default
judgment was entered against Bryan Kuhn , signed on February 1, 2021, which:
confirmed the prior preliminary default ; declared that Bryan Kuhn had been duly
notified of the tax sale ; found that the August 2015 tax sale , evidenced by the tax
sale certificate, was valid as to Bryan Kuhn, the owner of an undivided 100% interest
in the property; and declared the title to the subject immovable property quieted and
that NARS was the full owner of Kuhn’s interest, entitled to a writ of possession .
Bryan Kuhn devolutively appealed the district court judgment.
On appeal, the appellate court ruled that “if all of the allegations set forth in
the petition were denied by defendant, … NARS failed to introduce evidence into
the record sufficient to overcome those objections and denials” and, therefore, “[t]he
evidence offered by NARS in support of a preliminar y default was insufficient
because no evidence was produced that showed that notice of the tax delinquency or
the tax sale had been attempted or made upon the three 2015 co -owners.” NAR
Solutions, Inc. v. Kuhn , 21-0256 at p. 13 (emphasis added). Thus, the appellate
court concluded that “NARS failed to establish a prima facie case to support a default
judgment,” and it vacated the district court’s February 1, 2021 default judgmen t

2 These documents show that a tax sale title to the instant property was again auctioned for unpaid
Jefferson Parish taxes, on August 16, 2017 . In that tax sale , the named delinquent taxpayer was
Mark Laughlin and the tax sale purchaser was Alpha Capital/BMO Harris . H owever, NARS
redeemed the property on September 21, 2020 on paying the requisite amount of $14,436.02.

4

against Bryan Kuhn. Id. NARS sought review of the appellate court decision, and
we granted it s writ application. NAR Solutions, Inc. v. Kuhn , 22-00425 (La.
5/24/22), 338 So.3d 45.
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Bryan Kuhn, who was the 100% property owner at the time this action to quiet
title was instituted, was duly served, and he was the only named defendant against
whom the judgment to quiet title was rendered in this case.
The procedure to quiet title following a t ax sale , “[a]fter expiration of the
redemptive period,”3 is set forth in La. R.S. 47:2266, which expressly states that “[i]f
no proceeding to annul the sale has been instituted after the lapse of six months after
the date of service of petition and citation, judgment shall be rendered quieting and
confirming the title and the full ownership inte rest therein.…” (Emphasis added.)
NARS introduced as evidence in the instant action, inter alia, the official certified
and duly recorded tax sale certificate as to the subject property, and La. R.S.
47:2155(B) provides that “[a] certified copy of the tax sale certificate is prima facie
evidence of the regularity of all matters regarding the tax sale and the validity of the
tax sale.” (Emphasis added.) See also La. Const. Art. VII, § 25(A) (“A tax deed by
a tax collector shall be prima facie evidence that a valid sale was made.”) (emphasis
added). “Therefore, the former property owner must then carry the burden of
proving any defects in the tax adjudication proceedings. ” Smitko v. Gulf South
Shrimp, Inc., 11-2566, p. 11 (La. 7/2/12), 94 So.3d 750, 757-58.
Because Bryan Kuhn took no action within the prescribed time period to annul
the tax sale, that failure is determinative under the particular facts and circumstances
of this case, and the judgment of default rendered by the district court in favor of

3 “The property sold shall be redeemable for three years after the date of recordation of the tax
sale, by paying the price given, including costs, five percent penalty thereon, and interest at the
rate of one percent per month until redemption.” La. Const. Art. VII, § 25(B)(1).

5

NARS and against Bryan Kuhn was proper. The jurisprudence cited by Bryan Kuhn,
rendered under different facts and circumstances and/or arising under the law in
existence prior to the changes in the law made by 2008 La. Acts, No. 819, effective
January 1, 2009 (see Central Properties v. Fairway Gardenhomes, LLC, 16-1855,
p. 10 (La. 6/27/17), 225 So.3d 441, 448), is not persuasive in this matter.
DECREE
Accordingly, we reverse the appellate court ruling and reinstate the judgment
of the district court.
REVERSED; DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT REINSTATED.