First National Bank, USA VS Vanacor Investments, L.L.C., Roddy A. Vanacor and Lot X-1, L.L.C.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2010 CA 0248 FIRST NATIONAL BANK USA VERSUS VANACOR INVESTMENTS L C RODDY A VANACOR AND LOT X1 L C Judgment rendered EP S 10 2010 On Appeal from the 17 Judicial District Court q Parish of Lafourche State of Louisiana Civil Number 107896 Division A J The Honorable John E LeBlanc Judge Presiding Mark C Landry Metairie Louisiana Counsel for Plaintiff Appellee First National Bank USA J Christopher Erny Houma Louisiana Counsel for DefendantsAppellants Vanacor Investments L C Roddy A Vanacor and Lot X1 L C BEFORE KUHN PETTIGREW JJ AND KLINE J pro tempore 7 t r1c0e e Judge William F Kline Jr retired is serving as judge pro tempore by special appointment of the Louisiana Supreme Court KLINE J Vanacor Investments L Roddy A Vanacor and Lot X1 L appeal C C a summary judgment and the overruling of an exception of prescription rendered against them and in favor of First National Bank USA FNB The judgment at issue revoked the transfer of immovable property from Vanacor Investments to Mr Vanacor and then to Lot X 1 L 0 After de novo review we affirm the judgment rendered by the trial court FNB filed this action against the appellants in November 2007 seeking a declaration of simulation and revocation of certain transfers by the three appellants in February 2006 The trial court concisely set forth the pertinent facts of this matter in its reasons for judgment The trial court rendered judgment accordingly and the appellants appealed raising five assignments of error The trial court thorough and insightful reasons for judgment adequately s explain the opinion and the decision of this court In response to the issue that the trial court erred in applying the La C art 2480 presumption of simulation we agree with the trial court that the facts surrounding corporeal possession did not change when title purportedly transferred between the appellants Thus no genuine issue of material fact exists that would preclude the grant of FNB motion s for summary judgment Beyond these observations no jurisprudential purpose would be served by our further comment Accordingly we issue this summary opinion pursuant to URCA Rule 216 Costs of this appeal are assessed to Vanacor Investments 2 C L Roddy A Vanacor and Lot X1 L C AFFIRMED Louisiana Civil Code Article 2480 provides as follows regarding the presumption of simulation When the thing sold remains in the corporeal possession orthe seller the sale is presuned to be a simulation and where the interest of heirs and creditors of the seller is concerned the parties must show that their contract is not a simulation 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
