2026-09-10 · Louisiana · Courts

What happened. The most consequential thing a Louisiana court did to owner-versus-board litigation this year was to decide what kind of claim it is. That question decides the deadline, and the difference is one year against ten.

Kurt Horton and Myong Horton v. Savannah Place Homeowners' Association, Inc., No. 56,945-CA, Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, decided July 15, 2026 (Cox, J.; before Cox, Robinson and Hunter, JJ.; Hunter, J., dissenting with written reasons), on appeal from the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District Court, Bossier Parish, No. 173,888. Published. Disposition: affirmed, costs to the Hortons.

The posture, which is narrower than the result sounds

This is a ruling on the association's exception of prescription. It affirms dismissal, but on a different article than the trial court used: the district court applied the former Civil Code article 3493, on damage to immovable property, and the Court of Appeal said article 3493 should not have applied — while holding the claim delictual under the then-applicable one-year period of article 3492, “so that the same result is achieved regardless.”

Nothing was decided about whether the board acted properly. The rehearing period was open at rendition; whether rehearing was sought or a writ application filed is not established.¹

What the owners had pleaded, and why it was characterised as tort

The dispute was about the association relocating a mail kiosk. The owners pointed to the declaration's statement of purpose about the health, safety and welfare of residents.

“The alleged damages arise from a specific course of conduct (i.e., the relocation of the kiosk) rather than a specified contractual duty or obligation contained in the Declaration.”

“As such, while Savannah Place expressed an intent to provide for the health, safety and welfare of its residents, this is not an all-encompassing contractual fiduciary duty for the personal health of each member unless it is coupled with the direct violation of a specific duty or restriction outlined in the sections of the Declaration.”

1. Horton v. Savannah Place Homeowners’ Ass’n, No. 56,945-CA (La. App. 2 Cir. July 15, 2026) — slip opinion with dissent ↩
2. La. R.S. 9:1141.3 — Applicability ↩
3. Act No. 158, 2024 Regular Session (SB 23) — enrolled Act text with the 2024 Revision Comments ↩
4. La. R.S. 9:1141.26 — Meetings, including the sixty-day challenge window ↩