Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Slater v. Culpepper, 99 So. 2d 348.

31 citing documents.

In Re Succession of Caraway 639 So. 2d 415 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
Neither document mentions any reservation of fruits from Harvey's property, , (1957), and the deed simply indicates that the funds used for the acquisition are separate.
Rabai v. Rabai 537 So. 2d 813 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
I ; Slater v. Culpepper, [ ], .
Turner v. Turner 533 So. 2d 31 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
(1957); Lane v. Lane (La.App.
Fouchi v. Fouchi 442 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
LaSalle Pump & Supply Co., Inc. v. LOUISIANA MIDLAND R. 433 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
The confusion may have resulted, in part, from a misinterpretation of Slater v. Culpepper [ , ], supra, but regardless of the cause, we find the record so incomplete that proper adjudication of the remaining issues is impossible.
Downs v. Downs 410 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Boagni v. Waterbury 403 So. 2d 856 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Reynolds v. Reynolds 388 So. 2d 1135 La. 1980
Matter of Succession of Vice 385 So. 2d 554 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Lane v. Lane 375 So. 2d 660 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Guilott v. Guilott 361 So. 2d 1271 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
Guilott v. Guilott 326 So. 2d 551 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
In ordering restitution of the fruits of the separate property of the wife, , (1957), to-wit: "Under our law the wife, unlike the husband, has the absolute right to restitution for her paraphernal effects and their fruits, either delivered to her husband or delivered for use to the community, save in instances governed by Article 2389 of the Civil Code, which is not applicable he
Foster v. Foster 330 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Emerson v. Emerson 322 So. 2d 347 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1975
Connell v. Connell 316 So. 2d 421 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Civil Code Article 2390 and 2391; , ; Gouaux v. Gouaux, La.App., ; Broyles v. Broyles, La.App., ."
Mier v. Troxler 235 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Succession of Slavich 232 So. 2d 846 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Civil *849 Code Articles 2390 and 2391; , ; Gouaux v. Gouaux, La.App., ; Broyles v. Broyles, La.App., .
Paxton v. Bramlette 228 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
She contends these funds were her separate property delivered to her husband for use by the community and that she is entitled to their full restitution, LSA-CC Article 2376, , (1957).
Broyles v. Broyles 215 So. 2d 526 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Ardoin v. LeBleu 208 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
445 , (1956); , (1957); Abraham v. Abraham, 230 La.
Succession of Sonnier 208 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1968
445 , (1956); , (1957); Abraham v. Abraham, 230 La.
Levy v. Joseph 180 So. 2d 862 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
(syllabus 5) ; Succession of Land 212 La.
Bordelon v. Bordelon 177 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
2 Cir., ; , ; Abraham *139 v. Abraham, 230 La.
Succession of Hollier 158 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
2 Cir., ; , ; Abraham v. Abraham, 230 La.
Vining v. Beatty 161 So. 2d 298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Coney v. Coney, supra; , .
Bailey v. Alice C. Plantation & Refinery Inc. 152 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
La.1949); , (On rehearing, 1957); K. & (La.App.
Smith v. Garrison 137 So. 2d 505 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
Giamanco v. Giamanco 131 So. 2d 159 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
" , , the Supreme Court held, however, that where only $1300 of community funds were deposited in an account with over $66,000 of separate funds, the community funds were too inconsequential to establish such a commingling as to constitute a transformation of the separate funds into community funds.
Culpepper v. Slater 131 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
962 , , 37 A.L. R.2d 1216; , ; Slater v. Culpepper, La.App.2d Cir., 1961, .
Slater v. Culpepper 129 So. 2d 499 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
962 , , 37 A.L.R.2d 1216 and , ).
Smith v. Smith 117 So. 2d 670 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1960
App.1954, ; Slater v. Culpepper, 1957, , 360 .