Comment by John A. Lovett
This Comment first provides an overview of the attempts of Louisiana courts to define batture and to delimit the scope of the levee servitude, culminating most recently in the DeSambourg case itself. Part III next surveys federal and sister state cases that have defined the ordinary high water line in order to provide a broader context for the Louisiana Supreme Court's definition in DeSambourg. The fourth part briefly examines the crucial choice of law issue, never fully addressed in DeSambourg, of whether federal or state law governs disputes involving the definition of batture or ordinary high water. Finally, this Comment concludes with a reconsideration of the DeSambourg ruling and suggests that the court's new definition of batture is consistent with the principles of Louisiana civil law and jurisprudence and is sensitive to Louisiana's unique hydrologic environment.
About the Author
John A. Lovett.
Citation
69 Tul. L. Rev. 561 (1994)