Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Jones v. Jones, 462 So. 2d 649.

16 citing documents.

  • Day v. Day 858 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, as follows: The record supports our conclusion that the agreement states a bargained-for arrangement advantageous to both parties.
  • Aufrichtig v. Aufrichtig 796 So. 2d 57 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, (La.App.
  • Taylor v. Taylor 772 So. 2d 891 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied
  • Williams v. Williams 760 So. 2d 469 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
    5 Cir.), writ denied, (La.App.
  • Boudreaux v. Boudreaux 745 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
  • McAlpine v. McAlpine 679 So. 2d 85 La. 1996
    App. 5th Cir.1984), writ denied, (post-separation waiver of permanent alimony valid); (La.App.
  • Ellefson v. Ellefson 616 So. 2d 221 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1993
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied it held enforceable a consent agreement whereby the husband agreed to pay a set amount of alimony until the wife's remarriage and she renounced her right to seek an increase for any reason whatsoever, including illness, loss of income, and/or inflation.
  • Stream v. Stream 614 So. 2d 138 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, (La.App.
  • Kirby v. Kirby 579 So. 2d 508 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
    App. 5th Cir.1984), writ denied, (La.App.
  • Johnson Bros. Corp. v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 556 So. 2d 154 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    Articles 2056, 2057; Kenner *157 (5th Cir.1984) writ denied
  • Coffey v. Coffey 554 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, (La.App.
  • Myers v. Myers 532 So. 2d 490 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, as follows: The record supports our conclusion that the agreement states a bargained-for arrangement advantageous to both parties.
  • Favret v. Favret 527 So. 2d 463 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied affirmed the enforceability of a community property compromise in which the husband promised to pay a set monthly sum until the wife remarried and the wife agreed not to seek an increase under any circumstances, which agreement the court termed "a bargained-for arrangement advantageous to *465 both parties."
  • Oberfell v. Oberfell 516 So. 2d 424 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, (La.
  • Tschirn v. Tschirn 504 So. 2d 1110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, (La.App.
  • Bonck v. Bonck 500 So. 2d 798 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    5th Cir.1984), writ denied, as follows: The record supports our conclusion that the agreement states a bargainedfor arrangement advantageous to both parties.