Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Fruge v. Muffoletto, 137 So. 2d 336.

48 citing documents.

State of Louisiana Versus Jerman Neveaux La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
State v. Mosk 257 So. 3d 206 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
7/1/14), , 581 (citing Fruge v. Muffoletto , , , 339 (1962) ).
Leija v. Gathright 211 So. 3d 592 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
Cajun Constructors, Inc. v. Ecoproduct Solutions, LP 182 So. 3d 149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
137 So.2d‘ 336, 341 (1962).
James Clifford Arrant v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. C/W Marvin Jack Barnett, Jr. v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. … La. 2015
So.2d 336 (1962): In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
Arrant v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 169 So. 3d 296 La. 2015
(1962): In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
Yana Anderson v. Ochsner Health System and Ochsner Clinic Foundation 172 So. 3d 579 La. 2014
Arrant v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 127 So. 3d 924 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
O’Regan v. Preferred Enterprises, Inc., supra, , (1962).
Louisiana All Star Baseball Corp. v. State ex rel. Department of Revenue Office of Charitable Gaming 77 So. 3d 288 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
The Louisiana Supreme Court, elaborating upon this principle, , (1962): In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
State v. Ingram 71 So. 3d 437 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
202 , (1972), , (1962):" Meaning should be given, if possible, to each and every section, and the construction placed on one portion should not be such as to obliterate another; so, in determining the meaning of a word, phrase or clause, the entire statute is to be considered.
Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc. 16 So. 3d 1065 La. 2009
Elaborating upon this latter principle, , (1962): In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
O'REGAN v. Preferred Enterprises, Inc. 758 So. 2d 124 La. 2000
Thus, , (1962), we said: In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
Cable & Connector Warehouse, Inc. v. Omnimark, Inc. 700 So. 2d 1273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Prejean v. Dixie Lloyds Ins. Co. 602 So. 2d 764 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
McNamara v. Bayou State Oil Corp. 589 So. 2d 1099 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Green v. Louisiana Underwriters Ins. Co. 571 So. 2d 610 La. 1990
Backhus v. Transit Cas. Co. 549 So. 2d 283 La. 1989
Control Masters, Inc. v. Molenaar 540 So. 2d 1291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
9:4802 and 4806, particularly section B of 4806, , (1962).
Clegg Concrete, Inc. v. Bonfanti-Fackrell, Ltd. 532 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
(1962) (interpreting former sections 4801 and 4811).
Meloy v. Conoco, Inc. 504 So. 2d 833 La. 1987
Boland v. Roussel 495 So. 2d 318 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
Nicolaides v. Roussel 495 So. 2d 323 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
Lake Forest, Inc. v. Cirlot Co. 466 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
(1962), the Third Circuit certified three questions relating to a lease situation when a lien is sought on an owner's property for materials ordered by the lessee or tenant.
Orleans Onyx, Inc. v. Buchanan 428 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
Johnston v. Morehouse Parish Police Jury 424 So. 2d 1053 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1982
Clark v. BOARD OF COM'RS, ETC. 422 So. 2d 247 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
Sinclair v. Justice 414 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1982
Roman v. Zuppardo 407 So. 2d 65 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Mason v. Norton 360 So. 2d 178 La. 1978
(1962), this Court stated: "In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
State v. Skinner 358 So. 2d 280 La. 1978
850 , (1972); , (1962); Johnson v. Sewerage District No. 2 of Parish of Caddo, 239 La.
Abbeville Lumber Co. v. Richard 350 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
Jackson v. State, Department of Public Safety, Driver's License Division 349 So. 2d 1319 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
“ , (1962): ‘In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
Subdivision Planning Engineers, Inc. v. Manor Development Corp. 349 So. 2d 247 La. 1977
Century National Bank v. Parent 341 So. 2d 1371 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
375 , (1970); , (1962); (La.App.
Board of Trustees of Fin. Auth. v. All Taxpayers 336 So. 2d 306 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Johnson v. Sewerage District No. 2 of Parish of Caddo, 239 La.
Quick Finance Service, Inc. v. Youngblood 320 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1975
State v. Cazes 263 So. 2d 8 La. 1972
(1962), we said: “In construing a statute, the primary object is to ascertain and, if possible, give effect to the intention and purpose of the legislature as expressed in the statute.
Parish of Jefferson v. Louisiana Department of Corrections 254 So. 2d 582 La. 1971
Fisher v. Albany MacHine & Supply Co. 246 So. 2d 218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
National Surety Corp. v. Colquitt 246 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
206, 207 (1935): “The law is clear that statutes in derogation of common rights such as those creating civil penalties and liens and privileges are to be strictly construed and are not to be extended by analogy or implication, or through considerations of equity.” , (1962); Construction Eng.
McCulley v. Dublin Construction Co. 234 So. 2d 257 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1970
Security Homestead Association v. Schnell, La.App., , handed down March 9, 1970; Pringle Associated Mortgage Corporation v. Eanes, La.App., .
Security Homestead Ass'n v. Schnell 232 So. 2d 898 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
39 ; Yellow Pine Lumber Co. v. Maniscalco, La.App., ; Berg v. Schneider, La.App., ; , .
Pringle Associated Mortgage Corporation v. Eanes 208 So. 2d 346 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Henderson v. Rossi 185 So. 2d 92 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
Appellant, Sanchez, contends that the work was contracted for by his tenant, Mrs. Rossi; that he had nothing to do with the work performed by plaintiff; and, under the circumstances of the case is not liable to plaintiff for payment for the work nor is his property lienable therefor, , .
Teche Concrete, Inc. v. Moity 168 So. 2d 347 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1965
WASHINGTON PAR. POL. J. v. Washington Par. Hosp. SD 152 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Washington Parish Police Jury v. Washington Parish Hospital Service District No. 1 152 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Fruge v. Muffoletto 140 So. 2d 173 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962