Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Norah v. Crawford, 49 So. 2d 751.

13 citing documents.

VON DRAKE v. Rogers 36 So. 3d 1218 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
See also, , (1950); Broussard v. Allen, 198 La.
RG Claitor's Realty v. Juban 391 So. 2d 394 La. 1980
(1950); Greenwood Planting & Mfg.
Pike v. Godchaux-Henderson Sugar Co. 368 So. 2d 1250 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Lemoine v. Lemoine 295 So. 2d 584 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
(1950) the court stated: “[8] Ownership of an interest is a necessary pre-requisite to an action in partition, and is an issue necessarily presented in such a proceeding.
Scurlock Oil Company v. Getty Oil Company 294 So. 2d 810 La. 1974
(1950), and the many cases cited there.
Succession of Fontenot v. Demaret 185 So. 2d 861 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
* ?|c :J< H And, , , our Supreme Court said: “The allegation of ownership of an interest is fundamental and essential to an action of partition.
Neck v. Neck 169 So. 2d 401 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
475 , ; , ; Kelly v. Moore, 225 La.
Succession of Favalora 169 So. 2d 197 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Pitts v. Neugent, 187 La.
Johnson v. Lemons 157 So. 2d 752 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1963
2286 and 3556, which concern the principle of res judicata, the court, , , stated: " In the interpretation of these codal provisions the following jurisprudence has evolved and become firmly established: `It matters not under what form, whether by petition, exception, rule or intervention, the question be presented, whenever the same question recurs between the same par
Succession of Bonnecaze 149 So. 2d 663 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1963
— Thing adjudged is said of that which has been decided by a final judgment, from which there can be no appeal, either because the appeal did not lie, or because the time fixed by law for appealing is elapsed, or because it has been confirmed on the appeal.” , , this quotation appears: “Matters once determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, if the judgment has become final, can never again-be called into question by the parties, or their privies, * * The United States Circuit Court of App
Blackwell v. Nagy 122 So. 2d 903 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
See Norah v. Crawford, 1950, , , especially at and 755, where the court discusses question at length and cites Code of Practice, Article 15, and Revised Civil Code, Article 1320, as authority for permitting such an attack.
Taylor v. Williams 107 So. 2d 319 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1958
475 , ; , ; Kelly v. Moore, 225 La.
Fouchaux v. Board of Commissioners 65 So. 2d 430 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
433 , , referring to Articles 2286 and 3556 of the LSA-Civil Code, said: “In the interpretation of these codal provisions the following jurisprudence has evolved and become firmly established: ‘It matters not under what form, whether by petition, exception, rule or intervention, the question be presented, whenever the