Summary
The Louisiana Supreme Court held that Outkast Industrial Group, LLC, formed after termination of the parties’ community property regime, was the separate property of Michael B. Reis rather than a community asset. The Court rejected the lower courts’ use of the “substitute corporation” theory and held that alleged mismanagement of former community property may support fiduciary-duty remedies but does not change the classification of a subsequently formed business entity. The judgment was reversed and the matter remanded.
Holdings
- Outkast Industrial Group, LLC, formed approximately four months after termination of the parties' community regime, is Michael Reis's separate property; the presumption that property possessed during the community regime is community property does not apply.
- Louisiana law does not recognize the concept of a 'substitute corporation,' and a newly formed business does not become community property merely because it is similar to, succeeds, or allegedly receives resources from a former community business.
- Alleged mismanagement or breach of the duty to preserve former community property may support separate remedies, but it does not convert a separate entity formed after termination of the community into community property.
Questions Presented
- Whether a business entity formed after termination of a community-property regime may be classified as community property merely because it performs functions similar to a former community business or allegedly uses community-business resources.
- Whether Louisiana law recognizes a separate business formed after termination of the community as a 'substitute corporation' that becomes part of the former community property partition.
- Whether alleged post-termination mismanagement or breach of fiduciary duty concerning former community property changes the separate-property classification of a newly formed entity.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (8)
- Queenan v. Queenan, 492 So. 2d 902 (La. App. 3 Cir. 1986)(rejected as a basis for classifying the new entity as community property)
- Granger v. Granger, 06-1615 (La. App. 3 Cir. 9/26/07), 967 So. 2d 540(rejected in part)
- Robinson v. Robinson, 99-3097 (La. 1/17/01), 778 So. 2d 1105(followed)
- Ross v. Ross, 02-2984 (La. 10/21/03), 857 So. 2d 384(followed)
- Lanza v. Lanza, 04-1314, 04-1756 (La. 3/2/05), 898 So. 2d 280(followed)
- Reis v. Reis, 04-750 (La. App. 4 Cir. 4/3/25), 418 So. 3d 79(reversed)
- Terry v. Terry, 565 So. 2d 997, 1001 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990)(criticized by implication)
- Michael B. Reis, Jr. v. Mandy Pohlmann Reis, 25-539 (La. 9/16/25), 418 So. 3d 892 (mem.)(procedural history)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…