Joseph Marriott
Attorney
CONTACT
935 Gravier Street, Suite 2020
New Orleans, LA 70112
Phone:
(504) 324-1886
Fax:
(504) 534-8961
Email:
joseph@snw.law
PRACTICE
- Real Estate Transactions
- Business General Counsel
- Tax Title Litigation
Joseph Marriott earned his Juris Doctorate from Loyola University of New Orleans College of Law. He received his civil law degree and a certificate in tax law. While at Loyola, he was an active member in several student organizations including the Real Estate Law Society, Student Bar Association, Tax Law Society, and Tax Law Clinic. Additionally, Joseph stayed active in the New Orleans real estate industry by working as a legal clerk for the New Orleans commercial real estate firm of NAI Latter & Blum.
Originally, from Bettendorf, Iowa, Joseph relocated to New Orleans just prior to Hurricane Katrina. In post-Hurricane Katrina New Orleans, Joseph met his wife Linsey and received his B.A. from Tulane University. Prior to pursuing his law degree, he spent several years in the private sector where he worked as a manager in the construction and hospitality industry.
In addition to practicing law, Joseph is a Louisiana licensed real estate and title insurance agent. He is active in several civic organizations including the New Orleans Bar Association Real Property Section, Louisiana Land Title Association, New Orleans Regional Council of Business Economics, and Young Leadership Council of New Orleans.
Joseph maintains a successful real estate practice where he represents businesses, banks, lenders, brokers, agents, and individuals in all capacities and forms of commercial and residential real estate transactions and litigation. His practice includes representing parties in sales, purchases, and leasing of real estate, zoning issues, redhibitory defect litigation, contract disputes, and tax title suits.
When Joseph is not working, he enjoys spending time with his wife and young son, Brady, partaking in all the treasures New Orleans has to offer – food, family and friends.
MORE ABOUT JOSEPH
The Foundation: What Is Authority in a Real Estate Sale? When a Louisiana property changes hands, most buyers and sellers focus on price, inspections, and closing costs. But one of the most critical—and overlooked—questions in any real estate transaction is deceptively simple: Does the person signing the deed actually have the legal authority to sell? Authority in real estate transactions refers to the legal power a person has to act on behalf of another party—whether that party is an individual, a business entity, or an estate. In Louisiana, understanding how authority is established, documented, and verified is essential for any buyer, seller, or real estate professional involved in a transaction. How Authority Is Established for Sales Involving Corporations, LLCs, Powers of Attorney, and Trusts. Authority can take many forms depending on who owns the property. When the seller is a corporation, authority typically flows from the entity's articles of incorporation, bylaws, and a corporate resolution authorizing the sale—meaning someone must verify that the signing officer has been specifically empowered to execute the transaction. For a Louisiana LLC, the operating agreement governs who can act on the company's behalf; in a member-managed LLC, all members may need to sign, while a manager-managed LLC grants authority to the designated manager. When a property owner is incapacitated or otherwise unavailable, a power of attorney (POA) may authorize another person—called the agent or attorney-in-fact—to sign on their behalf. Louisiana law requires that a POA used in a real estate sale be in authentic form a/k/a an authentic act (executed before a notary and two witnesses) or via an act under private signature duly acknowledged (signed not before a notary but attested to signature in front of notary and two witnesses.) Trustees acting on behalf of a trust must have authority under the trust instrument, and succession representatives must obtain proper court authority before conveying estate property. The Consequences of an Unauthorized Sale in Louisiana. The consequences of an unauthorized sale in Louisiana can be severe. Under Louisiana Civil Code Article 2021 and related provisions, a contract made without proper authority is generally null and unenforceable - meaning the purported buyer may receive no valid title at all. Even if the sale is recorded in the public records, a title defect from lack of authority can surface years later, potentially exposing the buyer, their lender, and subsequent owners to costly litigation. This is why Louisiana title attorneys and title insurance companies carefully examine corporate resolutions, LLC operating agreements, certified copies of powers of attorney, and court orders before allowing a closing to proceed. If you are purchasing property in Louisiana - or selling on behalf of an entity or another individual - working with an experienced real estate attorney to verify proper authority is not just advisable, it is essential to protecting your investment and ensuring a clean, marketable title. To learn more or to schedule a consultation, contact Joseph R. Marriott at joseph@snw.law or by telephone at (504)324-1886.
I am often asked, why do I need title insurance? From an attorney’s perspective, title insurance is not a luxury — it is a fundamental risk management tool that protects the viability of your entire real estate development. As a developer, you are often acquiring property with the expectation that you can build, finance, and ultimately convey clear title to end users or investors. Title insurance ensures that the ownership rights you believe you are acquiring are, in fact, valid and enforceable. Unlike other forms of insurance that protect against future events, title insurance protects against defects that already exist but may not yet be discovered. These can include prior undisclosed liens, boundary disputes, errors in public records, fraud, or improperly executed documents in the chain of title. Any one of these issues can delay your project, increase costs, or even jeopardize your ability to proceed with development. Lenders will require a lender’s title policy as a condition of financing, but that policy only protects the lender’s interest—not yours. An owner’s title policy is what protects your equity investment in the property. Without it, you are effectively self-insuring against potentially significant legal and financial exposure. In development projects, timing is critical, and title issues can bring progress to a halt. Title insurance provides not only indemnity coverage but also a legal defense if a claim arises. This means the insurer will step in to resolve disputes, often without direct cost to you beyond the premium. Additionally, title insurance can be tailored through endorsements to address specific development risks, such as zoning, access, and contiguity of parcels. This customization is particularly important in complex assemblages or phased developments. From a transactional standpoint, having title insurance in place also enhances marketability. Future buyers, investors, and lenders will expect clean, insured title as part of their due diligence. Ultimately, title insurance allows you to move forward with confidence, knowing that hidden defects will not undermine your project after significant capital has been deployed. It is a relatively small, one-time cost compared to the scale of risk it mitigates. In short, title insurance is not just about protecting title—it is about protecting your entire development strategy. To learn more or to schedule a consultation, contact Joseph R. Marriott at joseph@snw.law or by telephone at (504)324-1886.
For compliance officers and legal professionals who spent the early months of 2026 preparing for the new FinCEN Residential Real Estate Reporting Rule, last week brought a significant development: a federal court struck down the rule entirely. The decision vacates the regulation nationwide — but with conflicting rulings across circuits, the compliance landscape remains anything but settled. Background: What Was the FinCEN Real Estate Reporting Rule? The Residential Real Estate Reporting Rule, which took effect on March 1, 2026, was FinCEN’s most ambitious attempt to date to close a well-documented gap in the U.S. anti-money laundering (AML) framework. Unlike residential mortgages — which are already subject to robust Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) reporting — all-cash real estate transactions had largely flown under the regulatory radar. The rule targeted non-financed transfers of residential real property where the buyer was a legal entity or trust. Under its terms, “reporting persons” (primarily title companies, escrow agents, and settlement attorneys) were required to: Identify and verify the beneficial owners of purchasing entities and trusts Collect detailed information about the transferee, transferor, and the property File a Real Estate Report with FinCEN within 30 days of closing Retain records for five years Unlike FinCEN’s earlier Geographic Targeting Orders (GTOs), the new rule carried no geographic limitation or minimum transaction threshold — making it the broadest real estate AML reporting mandate ever issued. The Court’s Decision: Flowers Title Companies v. FinCEN The challenge came from Flowers Title Companies, LLC, a Texas-based title company that filed suit under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), arguing that FinCEN had exceeded the statutory bounds of the Bank Secrecy Act in issuing the rule. Judge Jeremy D. Kernodle of the Eastern District of Texas agreed. The court held that cash real estate transfers to entities and trusts are not categorically “suspicious” within the meaning of the BSA — the foundational basis FinCEN relied upon to justify the rule. Without the ability to rely thereupon, the agency now appears to lack the authority to impose the sweeping reporting requirements at issue. The result: the rule is vacated in its entirety, restoring the pre-March 1 status quo. Title companies and other covered persons have no current obligation to file Real Estate Reports under the vacated regulation. Why This Matters for Compliance and Legal Teams For compliance professionals, the ruling creates a complex and potentially short-lived reprieve. Here’s what to keep in mind: Reporting is currently suspended — but not permanently. The government is widely expected to appeal to the Fifth Circuit. Conflicting precedent creates legal uncertainty. Other federal courts have recently upheld the rule as lawful, meaning the law in this area is genuinely unsettled. GTOs remain in effect. FinCEN’s existing Geographic Targeting Orders in high-risk metro areas (including Miami, New York, Los Angeles, and others) are unaffected by this ruling. Compliance with active GTOs is still required. Internal readiness work retains value. Organizations that invested in beneficial ownership verification workflows, data collection systems, and training should preserve those efforts. If the rule is reinstated on appeal, a rapid ramp-up will be necessary. The Bigger Picture: AML and Real Estate The Flowers Title ruling is a setback, but not necessarily a death blow, to FinCEN’s long-term agenda around real estate AML. The U.S. real estate market has been identified by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and FinCEN itself as a significant vulnerability for money laundering. Whether through rulemaking, expanded GTOs, or Congressional action, regulators are unlikely to abandon this area. To learn more or to schedule a consultation, contact Joseph R. Marriott at joseph@snw.law or by telephone at (504)324-1886.
