FROM THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF CONCORDIA,
NO. 47, 021 HONORABLE GLEN WADE STRONG, DISTRICT JUDGE
Martin King, Trustee of Billy D. King Trust, Deborah Ann King
Rudolph, Trustee of Billy D. King Trust, Michael Todd King,
Trustee of Billy D. King Trust, and Stephen Paul King,
Trustee of Billy D. King Trust Defendants/Appellees
J. Davidson, III Plaintiff/Appellant
Michael Veron Plaintiff/Appellant
Russell Purvis, Jr. Smith, Plaintiff/Appellant
Woodford Hallack Defendant/Appellee
composed of Ulysses Gene Thibodeaux, Chief Judge, Shannon J.
Gremillion, and John E. Conery, Judges.
ULYSSES GENE THIBODEAUX CHIEF JUDGE
River Crawfish Farms, LLC (Black River) filed suit against
several mineral servitude owners, asserting restoration
claims pursuant to La.R.S. 31:22 (hereinafter "Article
22") for the contamination of its property resulting
from historical oil and gas exploration activities.
Thereafter, certain alleged servitude owners, John Martin
King, Michael Todd King, Stephen Paul King, and Deborah Ann
King Rudolph, as Trustees of the Billy D. King, M.D.
Revocable Trust (King Trustees), filed a peremptory exception
of prescription of nonuse. The trial court granted the
exception, dismissing Black River's claims with
prejudice. Finding no error in the trial court's
reasoning as to the effect of the extinguishment of the
mineral servitude by prescription of ten years nonuse, we
affirm the dismissal of Black River's claims against the
King Trustees after first noticing and sustaining an
exception of no right of action against Black River.
River asks this court to decide:
(1) whether the trial court's reasons for holding that
Black River's restoration claims under Article 22 were
prescribed by nonuse are supported by the law and the
(2) whether the trial court's reasons for holding that
Black River's claims against the King Trustees were
barred by the subsequent purchaser rule are supported by the
(3) whether the trial court's reasons for holding that
the King Trustees were not jointly and severally liable with
the other servitude owners and oil and gas operators who
contaminated Black River's property are supported by the
law and the evidence; and
(4) whether the trial court erred by holding that the
doctrine of judicial estoppel did not bar the King Trustees
from disavowing their mineral servitude on the eve of trial,
after the window for discovery had closed?