## Facts

- Peterson M. Yokum and Polly Elizabeth Anderson owned and lived in a residence at 723 Toulouse Street in the French Quarter.
- 615 Bourbon Street, L.L.C. owned nearby commercial property at 615–617 Bourbon Street and leased it to O’Reilly Properties, L.L.C. for “legitimate, commercial” use.
- The lease prohibited unlawful or injurious use and treated uncured unlawful/injurious use as a breach after notice, giving the lessor contractual remedies.
- The lessee operated a bar (“The Rock”) that played loud amplified music, often live, from afternoons into late night and early morning.
- The homeowners alleged the music was excessively loud, violated city noise ordinances, and interfered with their quiet enjoyment of their home.
- The homeowners alleged they repeatedly complained and that the owner/lessor had notice and the ability, through lease rights and ownership control, to curb or end the offending use but failed to do so.
- The homeowners sued for damages and injunctive relief, including claims against the owner/lessor under Louisiana Civil Code art. 667.

## Issues

1. Whether Louisiana Civil Code art. 667 can impose potential liability on a property owner/lessor for damage to neighbors caused by a lessee’s allegedly excessive noise.
2. Whether the owner/lessor was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law on the theory that a landlord is not liable for a tenant’s nuisance.

## Decision

- The Louisiana Supreme Court reversed the judgment affirming summary judgment for 615 Bourbon Street, L.L.C.
- The Court held the lower courts erred in concluding, under the facts presented, that the owner/lessor could not be responsible under Civil Code art. 667 for the lessee’s alleged conduct.
- The Court found genuine issues of material fact on the severity and unlawfulness of the noise, the lessor’s knowledge, and the lessor’s ability to abate the condition through lease rights and applicable law.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- Civil Code art. 667 imposes “neighborhood responsibility” on a proprietor for uses of property that cause damage to neighbors, focusing on the nature and use of the estate rather than only the proprietor’s personal acts.
- A lessor is not categorically insulated from art. 667 liability merely because a tenant is the immediate source of the damaging activity.
- Lease provisions restricting unlawful or injurious use and providing remedies for breach may be relevant to whether the lessor had sufficient control or ability to abate the alleged nuisance.
- Whether an alleged nuisance (including excessive noise) causes compensable interference and whether the lessor had knowledge and abatement capacity are fact-intensive questions that may preclude summary judgment.

## Conclusion

The Louisiana Supreme Court vacated summary judgment for the property owner/lessor, holding that art. 667 may permit liability for a tenant-created noise nuisance where factual disputes exist regarding damage, ordinance violations, notice, and the lessor’s capacity to prevent or stop the harmful use.


Yokum v. 615 Bourbon St., L.L.C., 977 So. 2d 859 (La. 2008)