Is a squatter a tenant — and what rights do they have?
Louisiana’s criminal trespass law defines a squatter as someone with no lease and no right to be there — but it says so for the criminal law, and we could not establish whether the eviction rules treat him as a tenant. Either way he is not nothing: once someone has been in the building for more than a year, they can sue the person who throws them out — and that person is you, deed or no deed.
›Read the law — 3 provisions
If a trespasser counts as a tenant, the owner is routed into housing court and every fast option closes.
1 · La. R.S. 14:63(C)(2)(b) — "squatter" defined (Acts 2024, No. 652)
“(2) For purposes of this Subsection: … (b) "Squatter" means any person who remains in or upon property to which the person lacks a right of possession, ownership, occupancy, or a lease interest.”
READ THE FIRST SEVEN WORDS — THEY ARE THE LIMIT OF WHAT THIS DEFINITION DOES. "For purposes of this Subsection" scopes it to the criminal trespass subsection; it does not say a squatter is not a tenant, and nothing in it speaks to the eviction Title at all. (The ellipsis stands for subparagraph (a) and its items (i)–(iv), which define "remain in or upon property" and include the squatter, a person violating an injunction, and a drone.) What the definition does deny him is a list of four things, and "a lease interest" is one of them — and the same subsection lists the squatter separately from an "occupant, as defined by Code of Civil Procedure Article 4704", so the legislature treated the two as different people. Whether that makes him a tenant for eviction purposes is the next link, and we do not resolve it.
Read it at the source →2 · La. C.C.P. art. 4704 — definitions used in the eviction Title
“Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, as used in this Title the following terms have the following meanings: 'Lease' means any oral or written lease, and includes a sublease; 'Lessee' includes a sublessee, whether the person seeking to evict is a lessor or sublessor; and an assignee of a lessee; 'Lessor' includes a sublessor, assignee, or transferee; 'Occupant' includes a sharecropper; half hand; day laborer; former owner; and any person occupying immovable property by permission or accommodation of the owner, former owner, or another occupant, except a mineral lessee, owner of a mineral servitude, or a lessee of the owner; 'Owner' includes a lessee; and 'Premises' includes the land and all buildings and improvements thereon leased by a tenant, or possessed by an occupant.”
A CLAIM ABOUT OUR OWN SEARCH, NOT ABOUT THE LAW: this definition of "occupant" is written around a person occupying "by permission or accommodation of the owner", and a squatter is by definition there without permission. We looked for a Louisiana appellate decision resolving whether a pure squatter is an "occupant" who may be evicted under this Title, and we found none we could fetch on 2026-07-14. Note that R.S. 14:63(C)(2)(a)(i) plainly contemplates an occupant being served under Articles 4702 and 4703. We do not resolve it; ask a Louisiana lawyer which route fits your facts.
Read it at the source →3 · La. C.C.P. art. 3658 — what a possessory action requires
“To maintain the possessory action the plaintiff shall allege and prove all of the following: (1) The plaintiff had possession or precarious possession of the immovable property or real right therein at the time the disturbance occurred. (2) The plaintiff and his ancestors in title, or the person for whom the plaintiff possesses precariously and that person’s ancestors in title, had such possession quietly and without interruption for more than a year immediately prior to the disturbance, unless evicted by force or fraud. (3) The disturbance was one in fact or in law, as defined in Article 3659. (4) The possessory action was instituted within a year of the disturbance.”
This is not a tenant’s right and it is not ownership. It is the right to be left alone until a court says otherwise, and it attaches to possession rather than to title — which is why the year matters, and why an owner who takes matters into his own hands can end up the defendant.
Read it at the source →These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.