Writ application denied.
I respectfully dissent and would grant the writ. As noted by the 1982 Revision Comments to La. Civ. Code article 3479, the particular successor of a precarious possessor must acquire the entire property from the precarious possessor, not just the vendors interest, in order to acquire a title that will support acquisitive prescription.
In this case, the 1934 and 1942 conveyances from Pettigrew to Bourg reference which [vendor] owns, this just the sellers’ interest, not the entire property. Likewise, the conveyance from Bourg to his corporation in 1955 references Being the same property purchased by Harry Bourg from Ashby W. Pettigrew under date of April 10, 1942.
As only an interest in the property was conveyed, not the entire property, the title is insufficient to support acquisitive prescription. As co-owners generally cannot prescribe absent overt and unambiguous acts sufficient for notice, it appears expert witness Daniel Toups reached the correct result in this matter.
Hughes, J., would grant and assigns reasons.
Crain, J., would grant.
McCallum, J., would grant.