Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hawley v. Crescent City Bank, 26 La. Ann. 230.

11 citing documents.

Stafford v. Sumrall 21 So. 2d 83 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
and apparently it states the law by which the present case has to be decided.
Beal v. Ward 127 So. 423 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
Ricker v. Pearson, 26 La.
Hill v. Abell 5 La. App. 497 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
Billaudeaux v. Manuel 1 La. App. 219 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1924
His possession was that of a usufructuary, and the control of the property of the Estate referred to in Hawley vs. Crescent City Bank, , cited by counsel for appellant, was conferred upon him as surviving husband in community, until the debts of the succession were paid.
Andrews v. McCreary Lumber Co. 99 So. 579 La. 1924
Ann. 314 ; ; Ricker v. Pearson’s Heirs, 26 La.
Harman v. Legrande 91 So. 726 La. 1922
Luria v. Cote Blanche Co., 114 La.
Beck v. Natalie Oil Co. 78 So. 430 La. 1918
as follows: “Upon the dissolution of the community by the death of the wife, the responsibility of the husband in regard to the community debts is not changed.
Simpson v. Bulkley 73 So. 691 La. 1916
we quote: “In this case the husband had by law the usufruct of the wife’s half of the community property consisting of the undivided half of the lands seized by the judgment creditors; no partition of the community property having been made.
Schlieder v. Boulet 50 So. 617 La. 1909
Ad., v. Bank et al., ; Killelea et al. v. Barrett et al., 37 La.
Elizardi v. Kelly 39 So. 851 La. 1905
Ann. 314 ); if, upon the dissolution of the community, the husband’s liability for community debts is not changed (Hawley, Adm’r, v. Bank, ) — he should have the right as tutor of his children to provoke a sale of community property to pay debts.
Luria v. Cote Blanche Co. 38 So. 279 La. 1905
Ricker v. Pearson, 26 La.