Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Feazel v. Feazel, 62 So. 2d 119.

30 citing documents.

Leger v. Leger 829 So. 2d 1101 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
4 Cir.1977), the court stated that: " Feazel [v. Feazel, , (1952)] stands for the proposition that we must disregard the mother's testimony which would have the effect of making the child illegitimate, and it cannot overcome the legal presumption of paternity.
Smith v. Cole 553 So. 2d 847 La. 1989
1982); , (1952); (La.App.
Anding v. Anding 480 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
” The presumption of paternity created by this provision has been referred to as “the strongest presumption known in law.” , (1962).
Durr v. Blue 454 So. 2d 315 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Shorts v. Daniel 447 So. 2d 522 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
App.2d Cir.1965); , (1952); (La.
In Re Murray 445 So. 2d 21 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
The action to disavow, even in view of the amendments by Act 430 of 1976 seems to still be "peculiar to the father and can be exercised only by him, or his heirs, within a given time, and in certain cases" , (1952) (La.App.
Verneuille v. Verneuille 438 So. 2d 615 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
Cook v. Perron 427 So. 2d 499 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
IMC Exploration Co. v. Henderson 419 So. 2d 490 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1982
Mock v. Mock 411 So. 2d 1063 La. 1982
Migues v. Migues 398 So. 2d 1279 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Tenneco Oil Company v. Houston 372 So. 2d 1194 La. 1979
1 , (1956); , (1952); Kuhlman v. Kuhlman, 137 La.
Boudreaux v. Matt 370 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
Culbert v. Succession of Culbert 356 So. 2d 1080 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
548 , (1829) the well-established principle was recognized that “a child born during the marriage cannot have its condition affected by the declaration of one or both of spouses.” , (1952), a mother who filed a birth certificate for her baby showing her husband to be the father of her child, testified another man was in fact the father.
Hodges v. Hodges 348 So. 2d 1284 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
(1952) to be controlling here.
Succession of Mitchell 323 So. 2d 451 La. 1975
1 , (1956); , (1952); Kuhlman v. Kuhlman, 137 La.
Morrison v. Griffin 323 So. 2d 451 La. 1975
1 , (1956); , (1952); Kuhlman v. Kuhlman, 137 La.
Cosey v. Allen 316 So. 2d 513 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Dugas v. Henson 307 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
1 , (1956); , (1952); (La.App.
Heable v. Heable 248 So. 2d 847 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
(1952) and Singley v. Singley, La.App., (1st Cir. 1962).
Babineaux v. Pernie-Bailey Drilling Co. 250 So. 2d 224 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Article 184 of the Louisiana Civil Code provides: “The law considers the husband of the mother as the father of all children conceived during the marriage.” The Louisiana Supreme Court has held that this presumption “is the strongest presumption known in law.” , .
George v. Bertrand 217 So. 2d 47 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
Succession of Barlow 197 So. 2d 682 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1967
Lewis v. Powell 178 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1965
Lambert v. Lambert 164 So. 2d 661 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
This is one of the strongest presumptions known in law, , , and "This presumption is conclusive, except in certain limited cases", Williams v. Williams, 230 La.
Melancon v. Sonnier 157 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
The presumption of legitimacy of a child born during the marriage "cannot be overcome except by the proof that the husband was so far away from the wife, when the child was conceived, that cohabitation was `physically impossible'", , .
Gillies v. Gillies 144 So. 2d 893 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
1 , ; , ; Lejeune v. Lejeune, 184 La.
Trahan v. Trahan 142 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
Art. 185 , where, in a very similar factual situation, the court first pointed out that under LSA-C.C.
Singley v. Singley 140 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Williams v. Williams 87 So. 2d 707 La. 1956
Tate v. Penne, 7 Mart.,N.S., 548; Lejeune v. Lejeune, 184 La.