Contra Non Valentem in France and Louisiana: Revealing the Parenthood, Breaking a Myth

• Author: Benjamin West Janke - François-Xavier Licari
• Position: Attorney, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC (New Orleans) - Dr. en droit (University of Strasbourg, France); Dr. iuris (University of Saarland, Germany); Maître de conférences (Associate Professor), University of Metz, France.
• Pages: 503-540

Contra Non Valentem in France and Louisiana:

Revealing the Parenthood, Breaking a Myth

Benjamin West Janke∗

François-Xavier Licari∗∗

But here comes your carriage, Colonel. Adieu, young folks.

Miss Julia, keep your heart till I come back again; let there be

nothing done to prejudice my right whilst I am non valens agere.1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction ..........................................................................504

II. Contra Non Valentem in Louisiana Law: A Spanish

Girl in French Dress, or Vice Versa? ...................................505

III. The Fate of Contra Non Valentem in France and

Louisiana: A Short Study in Parallel ...................................511

A. The Fate of Contra Non Valentem in France: From

an Announced Death to a Crowning Codification .........511

B. Contra Non Valentem in Louisiana: The

Animated Success Story of an Old Maxim ....................522

IV. Does Contra Non Valentem Apply to

Acquisitive Prescription? .....................................................527

A. The French Jurisprudence ..............................................529

B. The Louisiana Jurisprudence .........................................533

V. Conclusion ...........................................................................540

Copyright 2011, by BENJAMIN WEST JANKE & FRANÇOIS-XAVIER LICARI.

∗ Attorney, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC (New

Orleans); J.D. & B.C.L. (Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State

University); B.S. & M. Ed. (Vanderbilt University).

∗∗ Dr. en droit (University of Strasbourg, France); Dr. iuris (University of

Saarland, Germany); Maître de conférences (Associate Professor), University of

Metz, France.

All translations, unless otherwise indicated, are our own. The original text is

retained where appropriate.

1. WALTER SCOTT, GUY MANNERING OR THE ASTROLOGE R (1815).

504 LOUISIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 71

I. INTRODUCTION

At first blush, prescription in the Louisiana Civil Code takes

shape differently than in the French Civil Code. But as Justice

Oliver Otis Provosty of the Louisiana Supreme Court noted in

1918, both systems share a common ancestor:

The arrangement, distribution, or classification, of the

subject-matter of prescription in the Code Napoléon is not

the same as in ours. The two prescriptions, liberandi causa

and acquirandi causa, are there dealt with together, instead

of separately, as in our Code. Basing himself upon this, the

learned counsel for the defendant in this case contends that

these French decisions and authorities are not applicable.

The answer to that argument is that the principles of

prescription embodied in the two Codes are absolutely the

same. Both Codes are very largely, if not entirely, derived

in the matter of prescription from . . . Pothier’s treatises, De

la Propriété; De la Possession; De la Prescription;

Introduction aux Coutumes d’Orleans, at the part dealing

with Prescription; and Obligations. The French Code is

more condensed than ours, not expressing those things

which follow as logical consequences; whereas ours

expresses those consequences. That is the only difference.

But what is thus expressed in our Code and not found in the

Code Napoléon is found, mostly in the same words, in

Pothier. Pothier in his treatise De la Propriété has a chapter

headed “Comment se Perd le Domaine de Propriété,” “How

Ownership is Lost.”2

Justice Provosty’s comments are as true today as they were

when he wrote them in 1918. That is why the domain of

prescription, perhaps more so than any other mode of comparative

law between Louisiana and France, proves so fruitful.3

2. Harang v. Golden Ranch Land & Drainage Co., 79 So. 768, 778 (La.

1918) (Provosty, J., dissenting).

3. See Benjamin West Janke, The Failure of Louisiana’s Bifurcated

Liberative Prescription Regime, 54 LOY. L. REV. 620 (2008); Benjamin West

Janke & François-Xavier Licari, The French Revision of Prescription: A Model

for Louisiana?, 85 TUL. L. REV. 1 (2010); François-Xavier Licari, Le nouveau

droit français de la prescription extinctive à la lumière d’expériences étrangères

récentes ou en gestation (Louisiane, Allemagne, Israël), 61 REVUE

INTERNATIONALE DE DROIT COMPARÉ 739, 749 (2009) (Fr.); Benjamin West

Janke, Comment, Revisiting Contra Non Valentem in Light of Hurricanes

Katrina and Rita, 68 LA. L. REV. 498, 505–12 (2008) [hereinafter Janke,

Revisiting Contra Non Valent em].

2011] CONTRA NON VALENTEM IN FRANCE & LA. 505

In this Article, we will show that the relationship between

Louisiana and France is not limited to written law; it also exists in

one important extra-codal and equitable principle of prescription

law: contra non valentem agere non currit praescriptio.4 In this

regard, the juridical parenthood is tight. We will show that contra

non valentem in Louisiana is the fruit of French doctrine and

jurisprudence. Furthermore, we will bring to light the noticeable

similarity of the maxim’s fate in France and Louisiana. Courts in

both jurisdictions proclaimed it as dead, but despite the antagonism

it faced, contra non valentem evolved as a major component of

prescription’s institution. Finally, we will dispel a deep-rooted

myth that contra non valentem does not apply to the domain of

acquisitive prescription and reveal another strong convergence

between Louisiana and France.

II. CONTRA NON VALENTEM IN LOUISIANA LAW: A SPANISH GIRL IN

FRENCH DRESS, OR VICE VERSA?

The origin of the maxim seems enigmatic. When applying

contra non valentem in the 1817 case of Quierry’s Executor v.

Faussier’s Executors,5 the Louisiana Supreme Court did not

4. This is the formulatio n of the maxim in modern French Law. Sometimes

it is expressed as “Agere non valenti non currit praescriptio,” especially in

ancient French literature. See, e.g., FRANÇOIS IGNACE DUNOD DE CHARNAGE,

TRAITÉS DES PRESCRIPTIONS, DE L’ALIENATION DES BIENS D’EGLISE ET DES

DIXMES 270 (1730) (Fr.); 2 BALTHAZARD-MAR IE EMERIGON, TRAITÉ DES

ASSURANCES ET DES CONTRATS À LA GROSSE 287, 289, 305 (1783) (Fr.). In

German law, see Karl Spiro, Zur neueren Geschichte des Satzes “Agere non

valenti non currit praescriptio,” in FESTSCHRIFT FÜR H ANS LEWALD 585 (1953)

(Ger.). But everywhere the maxim is established, “contra non valentem agere

non currit praescriptio” is the usual form. E.g., Belgium (Jean Dabin, Sur

l’adage “Contra non valentem agere non currit praescriptio,” 1969 REVUE

CRITIQUE DE JURISPRUDENCE BELGE 93 (Belg.)); Italy (MAURO TESCARO,

DECORRENZA DELLA PRESC RIZIONE E AUTORESPONSABILITÀ—LA RILEVANZA

CIVILISTICA DEL PRINCIPIO CONTRA NON VALENTEM AGERE NON CURRIT

PRAESCRIPTIO (2006) (It.)); Scotland (JOHN HEPBURN MILLAR & MARK NAPIER,

A HANDBOOK OF PRESCRIPTION ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF SCOTLAND 100

(1893) (Scot.)). In Louisiana, one may encounter the latter form as well as

“Contra non valentem agere nulla currit praescriptio.” Many recent Louisiana

cases mistakenly use the expression “contra non valentum.” Presumably this is a

contagious typographical error. For a comparative survey on this maxim, see

further RAFAEL DOMINGO OSLÉ ET AL., PRINCIP IOS DE DERECHO GLOBAL, 1000

REGLAS Y AFORÍSMOS JUR ÍDICOS COMENTADOS 129 No. 70 (2006) (Spain)

(Agere non valenti non currit praescriptio); id. No. 210 (contra non valentem

agere non currit praescriptio). See also REINHARD Z IMMERMANN,

COMPARATIVE FOUNDATIONS OF A EUROPEAN LAW OF SET-OFF AND

PRESCRIPTION 132 (2002).

5. 4 Mart. (o.s.) 609 (La. 1817).