DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite William T. Burton Industries, Inc. v. Wellman, 343 So. 2d 996.

26 citing documents.

  • Dudenhefer v. Meraux Land Development, L.L.C. 840 So. 2d 1238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    It is our view that for the rule to be applicable two conditions must concur: First, there must be a visible boundary, artificial or otherwise; second, there must be actual uninterrupted possession, either in person or through ancestors in title, for thirty years or more of the land extending beyond that described in the title and embraced within the visible bounds.’ (Emphasis added) *1245 citing, Sessum v. Hemperley, 233 La.
  • Pace v. Towns 756 So. 2d 680 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    art. 794; William T. Burton Indus.
  • Bailey v. Descendants of Fowler 746 So. 2d 130 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Rathborne v. Hale 667 So. 2d 1197 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    444 , (1957), and most recently reiterated by our Supreme Court in William T. Burton Industries, : `[W]here there is a visible boundary which has been in existence for thirty years or more and the defendant in a boundary action and his predecessors in title have, in addition to the land described in the title, actually possessed land extending to that visible boundary, a plea of prescription of thirty ye
  • Harmon v. Harmon 617 So. 2d 1323 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    William T. Burton Industries
  • Williamson v. Kelly 520 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Sutton v. Rougeau 514 So. 2d 472 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Richard v. Thierry 509 So. 2d 604 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Schexneider v. Villejoin 493 So. 2d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    William T Burton Industries
  • Cooper v. Farris 491 So. 2d 390 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Merchant v. Acadia-Vermilion Irrigation Co. 476 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    3 Cir.1979); William T. Burton Industries
  • Williams v. Baughman 477 So. 2d 734 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    pronouncement of the Supreme Court in William T. Burton Industries, a case which applied old article 852: Possession to a physical boundary for thirty years, like the acquisitive prescription of thirty years established by Article 3475 of the Civil Code, entitles the possessor to the ownership of the property possessed.
  • Garnett v. Battistella 485 So. 2d 929 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    William T. Burton Industries, Thomas, supra.
  • Williams v. Peacock 441 So. 2d 57 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Fontenot v. Marks 430 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Morrison Grain Co. v. Charrier 410 So. 2d 1202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    As stated in William T. Burton Industries, : “A survey should be made despite the fact that the issue of possession of the property within the fence line for thirty years has been satisfactorily established in Wellman’s favor.
  • Travis v. Lake Superior Piling Co. 401 So. 2d 432 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    William T. Burton Industries, *435
  • Richardson v. Scrantz 385 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • Truly v. Woodard-Walker Lumber Co. 383 So. 2d 1329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    854 , ; William T. Burton Industries
  • Fruge v. Lyons 373 So. 2d 220 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
    Preliminarily and before addressing ourselves to this question we quote the following pertinent pronouncement of the Supreme Court in William T. Burton Industries, (La.
  • William T. Burton Industries, Inc. v. Monk 372 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
    444 , (1957); William T. Burton Industries, (La.App.
  • LeBlanc v. Laborde 368 So. 2d 1126 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
    William T. Burton Industries, (La.
  • Young v. Morvant 358 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
    In William T. Burton Industries, our Supreme Court sustained defendant's peremptory exception of prescription, finding possession in excess of thirty years by successive owners to a visible boundary (fence) between adjacent properties.
  • Gelpi v. Shall 355 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    444 , (1957), and most recently reiterated by our Supreme Court in William T. Burton Industries, (1977): "[W]here there is a visible boundary which has been in existence for thirty years or more and the defendant in a boundary action and his predecessors in title have, in addition to the land described in the title, actually possessed land extending to that visible boundary, a plea of prescription of thirty years
  • Brookshire v. Guidry 355 So. 2d 559 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
    William T. Burton Industries, Sessum v. Hemperley, 233 La.
  • Copellar v. Yount 344 So. 2d 1114 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
    NOTES [1] In this connection see the discussion concerning the necessity of visible boundaries and the necessity of "reliable evidence in the record on which an accurate description can be based" in the Louisiana Supreme Court case of William T. Burton Industries, (decided February 28, 1977).