# Crump v. Sabine River Authority

> Louisiana Court of Appeal · July 29, 1998 · 97 La.App. 3 Cir. 1572

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7715671

## Case

- **Full name:** Sarah Derrick CRUMP, Plaintiff—Appellee v. SABINE RIVER AUTHORITY, Defendant—Appellant
- **Court:** Louisiana Court of Appeal
- **Decided:** July 29, 1998
- **Citations:** 97 La.App. 3 Cir. 1572; 715 So. 2d 762; 1998 La. App. LEXIS 2226; 1998 WL 422987
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Ipeters
- **Judges:** Decuir, Ipeters, Peters, Woodard
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7715671

## Opinion text

| iPETERS, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion and would reverse the trial court’s judgment, finding that Ms. Crump’s claim has prescribed.
The one-year liberative prescriptive period for delictual actions begins to run from the day injury or damage is sustained, La.Civ. Code art. 3492. If the damage complained of is to immovable property, prescription begins to run from the day the owner “acquired, or should have acquired, knowledge of the damage.” La.Civ.Code art. 3493. While recognizing these legal precepts, Ms. Crump'ar-gues that the tort sued upon is a continuous tort and prescription begins to run only when the wrongful conduct ceases. This “continuing tort” theory was first addressed in South Central Bell Telephone Co. v. Texaco, Inc., 418 So.2d 531, 533 (La.1982), wherein the supreme court stated:
When the tortious conduct and resulting damages continue, prescription does not begin until the conduct causing the damage is abated.... Where the cause of the injury is a continuous one giving rise to successive damages, prescription dates , from cessation of the wrongful conduct causing the damage.
(Emphasis added).
Thus, the application of the continuous tort doctrine requires that both the tortious Izconduct and the resulting damages be continuous.
The majority concludes that Ms. Crump’s injuries were of a continuous nature such as to suspend the time for bringing her lawsuit. I disagree. All of the claims of negligence by Ms. Crump arise from one event — the illegal construction of the canal in the early 1970’s. Ms. Crump had actual knowledge of the alleged negligent acts in 1971 and failed to file suit until over twenty years later. The Sabine River Authority made no representations to Ms. Crump that it would solve the water flow problems. At best, it merely attempted to assist her in resolving the problem. I find that Ms. Crump acquired knowledge of her cause of action far in excess of a year before her suit was filed, that La.Civ. Code art. 3493 is applicable, and that her claim has prescribed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7715671. Public record. Not legal advice.