Letter: Couple whose brewery was taken by state deserve their day in court

The former Dixie Brewery building is seen in New Orleans, Oct. 19, 2007.  The old brick building where Dixie Beer was brewed before Hurricane Katrina is vacant. More than two years after the storm flooded it and looters devastated it, the building with its looming tower and ornate iron gates is gutted and surrounded by padlocked fences. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon) Show caption
The former Dixie Brewery building is seen in New Orleans, Oct. 19, 2007. The old brick building where Dixie Beer was brewed before Hurricane Katrina is vacant. More than two years after the storm flooded it and looters devastated it, the building with its looming tower and ornate iron gates is gutted and surrounded by padlocked fences. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

In 2011, the state of Louisiana took the Dixie Brewery from its owners, Joseph and Kendra Bruno, under its limited authority of eminent domain.

Later, under additionally questionable authority, the state transferred ownership to Veterans Affairs for its use within the new medical district. Within months following the seizure, the owners challenged the legality of the expropriation. The attorneys for the Brunos have multiple grounds based in both state and federal law that this expropriation and transfer is illegal, but they have not yet been allowed to make their argument. Instead, through complex maneuvering by attorneys for the state and a shell game of the court system, the intent appears to be to avoid, confuse and blur the real issue of legal ownership and due process.

In the most recent Civil District Court proceeding Tuesday, the judge continued the previous courts’ avoidance of the most fundamental facts. She refused to halt work on the historic building, including partial demolition.

She mostly justified her ruling due to the inconvenience and cost that would be placed upon the VA and its contractor. The VA, in acting prematurely, is accountable for the result of its irresponsibility. Until proper ownership can be resolved, all work should cease.

Whatever your beliefs about the project, certainly we can all agree property owners deserve to have the merits of their case heard in court before their property is irreparably harmed.

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states our government cannot deprive citizens of “...life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” Why is this most basic right being ignored by our courts? And where is the outrage?

R. Stephen Chauvin

architect

Metairie