DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Stutson v. McGee, 130 So. 2d 403.

16 citing documents.

  • Marks v. Zimmerman Farms, LLC 13 So. 3d 768 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    (1961), for the proposition that the quitclaim deed executed while a controversy over the property was brewing would not be accepted and applied.
  • Brown v. Wood 451 So. 2d 569 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
    See generally, , (1961); Sessum v. Hemperley, 233 La.
  • Roan v. Carter 427 So. 2d 1337 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
  • McPherson v. Roy 390 So. 2d 543 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
    Comment, `Tacking of Possession for Acquisitive Prescription', 8 La.L.Rev.
  • Fruge v. Lyons 373 So. 2d 220 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
    Comment, "Tacking of Possession for Acquisitive Prescription", 8 La.L.Rev.
  • Trahan v. Frankland 317 So. 2d 298 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
  • WJ Gayle & Sons, Inc. v. Deperrodil 300 So. 2d 599 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
    (1961) the Supreme Court, although in dicta, referred to the case of Durel v. Tennison, 31 La.Ann.
  • Carpenter v. Cobb 293 So. 2d 888 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
    [ , (1961)] In the present case, therefore, the plaintiffs may not `tack' the possession of their predecessors in title to their own possession to acquire by thirty years prescription under Article 3499 because as mentioned above, the disputed land was not described in their title.
  • Bunn v. A. J. Hodges Industries, Inc. 279 So. 2d 268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
  • State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Kilchrist 225 So. 2d 25 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    (1961), and citations therein.
  • Distinguished Martin Timber Company v. Taylor 187 So. 2d 196 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
    In this court, , , these possessions cannot be tacked.
  • Ponder v. Fussell 180 So. 2d 413 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    Comment, `Tacking of Possession for Acquisitive Prescription', 8 La.L.Rev.
  • Noel v. Jumonville Pipe and MacHinery Company 158 So. 2d 179 La. 1963
    The Court of Appeal, relying in great part on the case of Stutson v. McGee ( , ), found that there was no privity of contract between Frank S. Noel and his predecessors in title; that, consequently, the possession of Frank S. Noel's authors could not be "tacked on" to his own possession for the purpose of establishing possession for the thirty year period prescribed in Article 34
  • Stanford v. Robertson 144 So. 2d 747 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
    Comment, "Tacking of Possession for Acquisitive Prescription", 8 La.L.Rev.
  • Noel v. Jumonville Pipe & Machinery Co. 148 So. 2d 891 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    wherein the Supreme Court held as follows: “Unquestionably a person may actually possess an immovable for 30 years without any title and, by that means, acquire ownership thereof.
  • Baudin v. Charrier 137 So. 2d 440 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962