Fejta v. GAF Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1395 (5th Cir. 1986); Tedesco, 521 So.2d at 723-24; Daigle Assoc., Inc. v. Coleman, 385 So.2d 349 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1980), aff'd on other grounds, 396 So.2d 1270 (La. 1981); Krupp v. Nelson, 50 So.2d 464 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1951). See also Morvant v. Arnoult, 490 So.2d 549, 551 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1986); Sanders v. Rudd, 427 So.2d 1271, 1275 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1983). Appellant Gulf notes that this line of cases is not dispositive because the Louisiana Supreme Court, in affirming the appellate court's decision in Daigle, expressly refused to reach the question whether a contract for immovable property would require a writing ratifying authority.
See La.Civ. Code Ann. art. 2996, 2997 (West 1952), see, generally, id. at art. 3010 (West 1952);Morvant v. Arnoult, 490 So.2d 549, 551 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1986) ("if an agent executes the contract on behalf of the buyer or seller, the agent's authority must be expressed and in writing."); Ward v. Pennington, 434 So.2d 1131, 1137 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1983).
In contrast, the line of cases cited by the bankruptcy court holding that only written ratification is proper for immovable property expressly distinguishes between movable and immovable property. Fejta v. GAF Companies, Inc., 800 F.2d 1395, 1396 (5 Cir. 1986) (per curiam); Tedesco v. Gentry Dev., Inc., 521 So.2d 717, 723-24 (La.Ct.App. 1988), aff'd on other grounds, 540 So.2d 960 (La. 1989); Daigle Assoc., Inc. v. Coleman, 385 So.2d 349, 350 (La.Ct.App. 1980), aff'd on other grounds, 396 So.2d 1270 (La. 1981); see also Daigle, supra, 396 So.2d at 1272 (Blanche, J., concurring); Morvant v. Arnoult, 490 So.2d 549, 551 (La.Ct.App. 1986); Sanders v. Rudd, 427 So.2d 1271, 1275 (La.Ct.App. 1983); Krupp v. Nelson, 50 So.2d 464, 467-68 (La.Ct.App. 1951). In view of this authority, we are constrained to agree with the lower courts that Louisiana law requires a writing for ratification of immovable property contracts.