Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Alexander v. Burroughs Corp., 359 So. 2d 607.

142 citing documents.

Roy M. Bowes D/B/A Roy M. Bowes and Associates Versus Michael H. McIntire La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2022
Donald R. Modicue v. Prince Of Peace Auto Sale, LLC La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2021
Justiss Oil Company, Inc. v. Oil Country Tubular Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
Justiss Oil Co. v. Oil Country Tubular Corp. 216 So. 3d 346 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Hoffmann v. B & G, Inc. 215 So. 3d 273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Ryan v. Case New Holland, Inc. 211 So. 3d 611 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
Boes Iron Works, Inc. v. Gee Cee Group, Inc. 206 So. 3d 938 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
In its written reasons, (La.
Crescent City Cabinets & Flooring, L.L.C. v. Grace Tama Development Co. 203 So. 3d 408 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Thomas B. Catchings & -69 (La.1993), However, because a contract did not exist between the parties, interest cannot be awarded from the date of the alleged violation.
Guillot v. Daimlerchrysler Corp. 113 So. 3d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Nevertheless, I a Supreme Court decision that involved legal interest rather than interest that has accrued on funds on deposit in the registry of the court.
Hendrick v. Patterson 109 So. 3d 475 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
Crystal Smith v. Cappaert Manufactured Housing, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Additionally, compensation for the buyer’s use should not be granted automatically since “even the value of an extensive use may be overridden by great inconveniences incurred because of the defective nature of the thing and constant interruptions in service caused by the seller’s attempts to repair.” (La.
Smith v. Cappaert Manufactured Housing, Inc. 89 So. 3d 1234 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Additionally, compensation for the buyer’s use should not be granted automatically since “even the value of an extensive use may be overridden by great inconveniences incurred because of the defective nature of the thing and constant interruptions in service caused by the seller’s attempts to repair.”
Sam Staub Enterprises, Inc. v. Chapital 88 So. 3d 690 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Thomas B. Catchings & -69 (La.1993).
Verges v. DIMENSION DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. 32 So. 3d 310 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
Sabbath v. Martin 24 So. 3d 1035 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
NEWMAN MARCHIVE PART. v. City of Shreveport 923 So. 2d 852 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
Raines v. Columbia Lakeland Medical Center 923 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
The Supreme Court has also recognized this issue in a , 614 n. 6 (La.1978), in which they stated: It might be argued that, since plaintiffs only prayed for interest from date of judicial demand, they should be so limited.
Southern Marine Sales, Inc. v. Matherne 915 So. 2d 1042 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
the Supreme Court stated: One of the incidents of the obligations of contracts is that the one who violates those obligations is liable for damages "which the other party has sustained by his default."
Magee v. Brown 859 So. 2d 720 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Dailey v. the Home Furnishings Store 857 So. 2d 1051 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
the Supreme Court held that "credit for a purchaser's use of a product may be proper in certain instances" but that "[c]ompensation for the buyers use, however, ought not be granted automatically by the courts; even the value of an extensive use may be overridden by great inconveniences incurred because of
Kraus v. Wheat 856 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
the Supreme Court stated: One of the incidents of the obligations of contracts is that the one who violates those obligations is liable for damages “which the other party has sustained by his default.” C.C.1930 [now art.1994].
Bradford v. Onshore Pipeline Const. Co. 853 So. 2d 756 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Further, Eland Energy contends that the decision in Corbello, supra, [16]
Distinguished Bujol v. Entergy Services, Inc. 833 So. 2d 947 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Also in Jordan , -617 (La.1978), a redhibition case dealing with legal interest on attorneys fees as support for that proposition.
Corbello v. Iowa Production 806 So. 2d 32 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
the supreme court held that interest on a contractual obligation commenced from the date of default rather than from the date of judgment or judicial demand.
In Re New Orleans Train Car Leakage Fire Litigation 795 So. 2d 364 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
-614 (La.1978); (La.App.
Morrison v. Allstar Dodge, Inc. 792 So. 2d 9 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Capitol City Leasing Corp., 404 So.2d at 939 , -611 (La.1978).
Dalme v. Blockers Manufactured Homes, Inc. 779 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
Frentress v. Howard 728 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Bingham v. Ryan Chevrolet-Subaru, Inc., 29,453 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), ; Holloway v. Gulf Motors, Inc., (La.App.
Delaney v. Whitney Nat. Bank 703 So. 2d 709 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
the Supreme Court concluded that claims arising from a contract bear judicial interest from the date of judicial demand or from such earlier date when the claim became ascertainable and due.
Sharbono v. Steve Lang & Son Loggers 696 So. 2d 1382 La. 1997
this Court addressed the issue of interest on an award of damages and attorney's fees in a redhibition action.
Morris & Dickson Co. v. Jones Brothers Co., Inc. 691 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Bingham v. Ryan Chevrolet-Subaru, Inc. 691 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Howell v. American Cas. Co. of Reading 691 So. 2d 715 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
-14 (La.1978) (interest on attorney's fees awarded in redhibition suit ran from date of judgment rather than date of judicial demand).
Nolan v. Commonwealth Nat. Life Ins. Co. 688 So. 2d 581 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Sanderford v. Lombard 685 So. 2d 1162 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Dupree-Simpson Farms v. HELENA CHEMICAL 682 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Dixie Roofing v. Allen Parish Sch. Bd. 690 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Jessen v. Dr. Kenneth W. Wimberly, D.D.S., (La.App.
Meche v. Harvey, Inc. 664 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Deblieux, 390 So.2d at 236
National Tea Co. v. Plymouth Rubber Co. 663 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
La.Civ.Code art. 1932 (1870); Alexander v. Burroughs *809 Corp., see Mini-Togs Products, La.App.
Wellmeyer v. Western Reserve Life Assurance Co. of Ohio 663 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Hidalgo v. Old Hickory Ins.
Williams v. Louisiana Indem. Co. 658 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
IP Timberlands Operating Co. v. Denmiss Corp. 657 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
wherein damages were ascertainable on the date the plaintiff's attorney placed the defendant in default by formally demanding cancellation of a sale for redhibitory defect, and interest was awarded from the date of default instead of the later date when suit was filed.
Carpenter v. Lafayette Woodworks, Inc. 653 So. 2d 1187 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Huckabee v. Sunshine Homes 647 So. 2d 409 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
2d Cir.1977), modified on other grounds, (La.App.
Riverfront Investors Group v. Chavez 644 So. 2d 247 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
MASS. INDEM. & LIFE INS. v. Humphreys 644 So. 2d 818 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
The most recent decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court dealing with legal interest on a claim arising out of a contractual relationship is Alexander v. Burroughs Corp., [ ]....
Bourque v. Bailey 643 So. 2d 236 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
Palmer v. Benson Toyota Co. 641 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
LeBlanc v. Mercedes-Benz of North America 633 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
App. 1st Cir.1971); and Atkinson v. Total Computer Systems, Inc., (La.App.
McConathy v. McConathy 632 So. 2d 1200 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994