Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, 283 So. 2d 85.
-
Gmac v. Crain Chevrolet-Olds-Pontiac
595 So. 2d 346
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
1st Cir.1972), affirmed (La.
- McCormick Oil & Gas v. State 478 So. 2d 536 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
-
Barker v. Rust Engineering Co.
428 So. 2d 391
La. 1983
Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, C.C.P.
-
Darville v. Daigle Pontiac-Buick-GMC, Inc.
399 So. 2d 1252
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons
-
Berry v. Berry
371 So. 2d 1346
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
116 (1924); (1970); Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La., (1973).
-
Billedeaux v. Adams
355 So. 2d 1345
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
Art. 1039, Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons
-
In re Lagarde
358 So. 2d 983
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Art. 3556(31), Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons
-
City of Kenner v. Lawrence
355 So. 2d 268
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La., .
-
Martin v. Parish of Jefferson
351 So. 2d 1316
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
576 , (1965); Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons
-
Moutz v. Moutz
347 So. 2d 1287
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
See Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, (La.App.
-
Something Irish Co. v. Rack
333 So. 2d 773
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La., ; Malone v. Malone, La., ; Pan American Petroleum Corporation v. Cocreham, 251 La.
-
Kreshel v. Kreshel
326 So. 2d 887
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
See Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons et al.
-
Minsky v. Minsky
324 So. 2d 546
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
See Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, et al
-
Elrod v. City of Shreveport
322 So. 2d 339
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, et al., La., (1973).
-
Reeves v. Reeves
315 So. 2d 162
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Article 2162; Uniform Rules of the Courts of Appeal of the State of Louisiana, Rule VII, Section V(c); Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La., (1973); (La.App.
-
State v. Moore
305 So. 2d 532
La. 1975
In reversing in State v. Sam, we held, : "There is no showing that the witness has been diligently sought without avail or that the prosecution has made a good-faith effort to secure the witness' presence at the trial, in the absence of which showing the defendant's constitutional and statutory rights to have the live-witness testify before the trial jury
-
Payton v. Aetna Life and Casualty Company
299 So. 2d 489
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
In Thurman v. Star Electric Supply, Inc., La., (1973), the Supreme Court cited Wright, Jr. v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La., (1973) for the proposition that a "motion for a new trial by one defendant does not operate as if it were a motion for a new trial on behalf of all defendants."
-
Danel-Ryder, Inc. v. Van Way
297 So. 2d 282
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
2087, 2088, 2162; Courts of Appeal-Uniform Rules, Rule VII, Section 5(c); Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, (La.
-
Broussard v. Daigle
295 So. 2d 227
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
Article 2162; Uniform Rules of the Courts of Appeal of the State of Louisiana, Rule VII, Section V(c); Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La., (1973); (La.App.
-
Jones v. Starr
295 So. 2d 50
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
art. 2088, resulting from untimely filing of an appeal bond (see also Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La.1973, ), we dismiss this appeal although we have already taken it under submission after briefing and oral argument.
-
Woodsum v. New Orleans Public Library
289 So. 2d 878
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
However, the ordinary rule has been that an appeal by one solidary obligor does not “inure to the benefit of other solidary obligors”; see Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La.1973, .
- Deslattes v. First Management Corp. 286 So. 2d 714 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
-
Thurman v. Star Electric Supply, Inc.
283 So. 2d 212
La. 1973
Wright, Jr. v. Mark C. Smith & Sons et al., La., (judgments rendered June 11, 1973); Wright, Jr. v. Mark C. Smith & Sons Partnership et al., La.App.
-
Palmer v. Trestman
282 So. 2d 558
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
576 , (1966), to supply the closely-related plea that, as recently reaffirmed, Wright v. Mark C. Smith & Sons, La., (1973), our “jurisdiction”, as C.C.P.