## Facts

- Luzon Joiner, an elderly World War II veteran, owned a 198-acre tract in Union Parish, Louisiana.
- On February 18, 2004, Joiner sold the tract to Robert and Brenda Abercrombie for $110,000; an attorney, Bruce Hampton, drafted and notarized the deed.
- About a month later, the Abercrombies transferred the tract by exchange deed to Pinoak Investments, LLC, which later developed and sold the property as a residential subdivision.
- Hampton, an owner of Pinoak, signed the exchange deed as Pinoak’s authorized manager.
- Evidence indicated Pinoak effectively paid roughly $300,000 for the property, with part of the consideration allegedly routed through a timber-management agreement to conceal the true price.
- Joiner sued the Abercrombies for lesion beyond moiety, alleging the $110,000 price was less than one-half of the tract’s fair market value at the time of sale.
- The trial court dismissed the action for failure of proof; Joiner appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Joiner proved lesion beyond moiety by establishing that the $110,000 price was less than one-half of the tract’s fair market value at the time of the February 18, 2004 sale.
2. If lesion was proven and the buyers had already transferred the property, whether Joiner’s recovery was limited to the buyers’ profit from the transfer, subject to the statutory cap.

## Decision

- The court of appeal reversed the trial court’s dismissal and rendered judgment for Joiner.
- The court held Joiner carried his burden to prove the tract’s fair market value at the time of sale exceeded twice the $110,000 price, establishing lesion beyond moiety.
- Because the Abercrombies had transferred the property, the court applied the statutory remedy governing resale: Joiner could recover the Abercrombies’ profit from the transfer, not exceeding the supplement he would have received had the buyers kept the property.
- The court treated the Pinoak transaction, including evidence of concealed consideration, as significant circumstantial evidence of true value and the buyers’ profit.

## Legal Principles

- Lesion beyond moiety occurs when a corporeal immovable is sold for less than one-half of its fair market value; only the seller may claim lesion.
- Fair market value is determined as of the time of the sale and in the condition the property was in at that time.
- The seller bears the burden of proving lesion beyond moiety.
- When the buyer has sold the immovable, the seller may not sue the third-party transferee for lesion; instead, the seller may recover the buyer’s profit from the resale, capped at the supplement that would have been owed had the buyer retained the property.

## Conclusion

The court of appeal found the seller proved lesion beyond moiety based on contemporaneous valuation evidence reinforced by the subsequent transfer’s economic reality, and it awarded relief under the resale-remedy rule limiting recovery to the buyers’ profit subject to a statutory cap.


Joiner v. Abercrombie, 968 So. 2d 1184 (La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007)