A Louisiana court has upheld the eviction of a company from an alligator farm, marking a significant legal victory for the plaintiff. On August 8, 2024, Daneco, LLC filed a complaint in the Thirty-Second Judicial District Court against Just Gators, Inc., seeking to evict them from certain properties not covered under their lease agreement.
The dispute dates back to September 28, 2018, when Daneco entered into several agreements with Just Gators and LaGarto Properties under a Master Business Agreement. One key agreement involved leasing Daneco's alligator farm to Just Gators for $40,000 per month over six years, with an option to renew for another six years. The lease specifically covered "Grow-Up Buildings," food storage structures, freezers, cold storage incubators, vehicles like Polaris Buggies and John Deere Buggy, forklifts, and a Ford flatbed truck.
However, the relationship between Daneco and Just Gators soured over time. On May 11, 2022, Daneco issued a notice demanding that Just Gators vacate any unleased property. When Just Gators did not comply, Daneco filed an eviction petition on May 24, 2022. The petition described the unleased property as including heater sheds and pumps owned by Daneco but not specified in the lease agreement.
Just Gators contested the eviction by filing affirmative defenses and exceptions along with a reconventional demand. They argued that they had rights to occupy the disputed property based on implied terms in their agreements with Daneco. They claimed that the eviction was fraudulent and sought dismissal of the petition along with expenses and attorney fees.
The matter was heard on October 11, 2022. Subsequently, on March 5, 2023, the trial court ruled in favor of Daneco but failed to specify which properties were included in the eviction order. This led to an interim opinion by the appellate court on January 23, 2024. The case was remanded back to correct this deficiency within 45 days.
On March 7, 2024, an amended judgment clarified that Just Gators was ordered to vacate all properties except those explicitly listed in their Commercial Lease Agreement or Master Business Agreement dated September 28, 2018. These excluded properties included specific buildings and vehicles detailed in the lease.
Just Gators appealed this decision arguing that the district court erred by not considering whether some of these properties were necessary for fulfilling their contractual obligations or implied within their agreements due to usage or equity considerations.
In its ruling affirming the trial court’s judgment of eviction against Just Gators from specified properties owned by Daneco but not leased under any formal agreement between them; it emphasized that factual findings pertinent to contract interpretation should not be disturbed unless manifest error is shown (Constantin Land Trust v Pitre Industries LLC). It noted that contracts must be interpreted according to common intent (La CC art2045) without creating ambiguities where none exist (Campbell v Melton).
The appellate court found no manifest error in concluding that Just Gators used additional properties only with temporary permission from Daneco—a permission revoked through notice-to-vacate letters sent earlier last year—thereby rendering any claims about implied inclusion baseless since even admissions during trials confirmed disputed items weren't part-of-the-lease nor covered-by-$40k/month-payments stipulated therein either!
Attorneys representing both parties include Sye J Broussard for defendant-appellant (Just-Gator-Inc) while Stanwood R Duval & April A Trahan represent plaintiff-appellee (Daneco-LLC). Honorable Juan W Pickett presided over initial hearings held at Thirty Second Judicial District Court located within Terrebonne Parish State Louisiana Docket Number being193702.