Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 9:5555 (2026)

A. In accordance with Code of Civil Procedure Article 2636(8), there is no requirement that a note or other written obligation secured by a mortgage be paraphed for identification with the mortgage in order for the mortgagee to have the right to foreclose under the mortgage utilizing Louisiana executory process procedures. For purposes of executory process, the existence, amount, terms, and maturity of the note or other written obligation not evidenced by an instrument paraphed for identification with the act of mortgage or privilege may be proved by affidavit or verified petition.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§5555. Executory process in the case of notes or other obligations not paraphed for identification with the mortgage

A. In accordance with Code of Civil Procedure Article 2636(8), there is no requirement that a note or other written obligation secured by a mortgage be paraphed for identification with the mortgage in order for the mortgagee to have the right to foreclose under the mortgage utilizing Louisiana executory process procedures. For purposes of executory process, the existence, amount, terms, and maturity of the note or other written obligation not evidenced by an instrument paraphed for identification with the act of mortgage or privilege may be proved by affidavit or verified petition.

B. The affidavit or verified petition may be based upon personal knowledge or upon information and belief derived from the records kept in the ordinary course of business of the mortgagee, the creditor whose claim is secured by the privilege, or any other person. The affidavit or verified petition need not particularize or specifically identify the records or date upon which such knowledge, information or belief is based.

C. The affidavit shall be deemed to provide authentic evidence of the existence, amount, terms, and maturity of the obligation for executory process purposes.

Acts 1991, No. 652, §2, eff. Jan. 1, 1992; Acts 1993, No. 948, §2, eff. Jan. 1, 1994; Acts 1995, No. 1087, §3.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2024 · leading case: U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Dumas, 144 So. 3d 29 (La. Ct. App. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Dumas, 144 So. 3d 29 (La. Ct. App. 2014). “R.S. 9:5555 (applicable to executory proceedings involving an obligation not paraphed for identification with the act of mortgage and permitting the obligation to be proved by affidavit or verified petition).”

Bankers Trust Co. of California, N.A. ex rel. UCFC Loan Trust v. Verdin, 900 So. 2d 980 (La. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 3× “R.S. 9:5555 and 9:5556 provide for proof in executory proceedings of obligations not paraphed for identification with the mortgage, and for the manner of dealing with the mortgagee of record in such cases.”

Colonial Fin., LLC v. Colonial Golf & Country Club, Inc., 72 So. 3d 349 (La. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 5× “The Louis Lauri-cella sworn affidavit, which attests that the debt was due on December 31, 2009 and that the Club had not satisfied its obligation, was sufficient proof of the default as required by LSA-R.S. 9:5555, which states the affidavit may be based on personal knowledge…”

Mortg. Elec. Reg. Sys., Inc. v. Daigle, 10 So. 3d 288 (La. Ct. App. 2009). “These affidavits are sufficient proof of the default as required by R.S. 9:5555, which states the affidavit may be based on personal knowledge or upon information and belief derived from the records kept in the ordinary course of business of the mortgagee.”

Cmty. Dev. Capital v. Hous. Corp. of Am., Gregory Swafford, & Vanessa Marie Caliste Swafford (La. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “The first ground was that CDC did not attach to its executory process petitions authentic evidence of corporate authority to sign the promissory notes.”

Holding Renaissance Prop., LLC v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC (E.D. La. 2023). · cites it 2× “R.S. 9:5555, the amount, terms, and maturity of the note may be proven by affidavit or verified petition.”

Sun Realty, L.L.C. v. Doris J. Derouselle A/K/A Doris Derouselle (La. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “R.S. 9:5555 and La. R.S. 10:9-629. Id. Sun Realty cites these two statutes in support of its contention that its verification is valid.”

Asset One Louisiana v. Vulcan Minerals Engy (5th Cir. 2003). · cites it 3× “PER CURIAM:* At issue in these consolidated interlocutory appeals is whether the district courts erred in finding that appellee had complied with the requirements of La. Rev. Stat. § 9:5555 so as to avail itself of executory process and in denying the counter-complaint seeking…”

— La. Rev. Stat. § 9:5555(A) — 1 case

Holding Renaissance Prop., LLC v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC (E.D. La. 2023). “R.S. 9:5555, the amount, terms, and maturity of the note may be proven by affidavit or verified petition.”

— La. Rev. Stat. § 9:5555(B) — 1 case

Sun Realty, L.L.C. v. Doris J. Derouselle A/K/A Doris Derouselle (La. Ct. App. 2024). “R.S. 9:5555 and La. R.S. 10:9-629. Id. Sun Realty cites these two statutes in support of its contention that its verification is valid.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.