Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Porter v. Huckabay, 58 So. 2d 731.

14 citing documents.

Gatson v. Bailey 907 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
Moret v. Williams 582 So. 2d 975 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
(1952), (plantation road on defendant's property was public because substantial public funds to maintain it were expended with the full approval of the owner.)
Boynton v. Bertrand 309 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Many of the cases, , (1952), involve situations where the road was actually constructed by the public authority, although this is not decisive under the statute.
Mouton v. Bourque 253 So. 2d 689 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1971
Town of Eunice v. Childs 205 So. 2d 897 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1968
City of Alexandria v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad 126 So. 2d 351 La. 1961
618 , ; , ; B. F. Trappey's Sons, Inc. v. City of New Iberia, 225 La.
Le Boeuf v. Roux 125 So. 2d 444 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
Curtis v. Goebel, La.App.
Wyatt v. Hagler 107 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
Curtis v. Goebel 101 So. 2d 462 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
675 , ; , ; Elum v. Kling, La.App.
Harris v. Avoyelles Parish Police Jury 99 So. 2d 482 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
are generally furnished and kept up by the owners of estates adjacent to them.’ *485 “And under article 706 of the Civil Code a private road is defined as follows, viz.: “ ‘Private roads are those which are only open for the benefit of certain individuals, to go from and to their homes, for the service of their lands, and for the use of some estate exclusively.’ ” And in Porter v. Huckabay, 1952, , , the court reversing La.App., , said: “The language of the statute designating a road to be publi
Elum v. Kling 98 So. 2d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
and Fontenot v. Veillon, La.App., , saying: “We believe that the testimony adduced by the plaintiffs’ witnesses shows without a doubt that the road was kept up by the Police Jury for a period in *703 excess of three years and the testimony of the defendant’s witnesses does not controvert
White v. Kinchem 94 So. 2d 497 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
as well as the holdings of this court in Fontenot v. Veillon, La.
Wharton v. City of Alexandria 77 So. 2d 1 La. 1954
709 ; , ; Ferrente v. Tantilla, La.App., ; and Miguez v. Gautreaux, La.App., .
Fontenot v. Veillon 72 So. 2d 587 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
which was decided by the Supreme Court only a short time ago.