Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. Watt, 26 So. 70.

18 citing documents.

Landry v. Parish of East Baton Rouge 343 So. 2d 207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
1345 , (1899); and, (2nd La.App.1956).
Gamburg v. City of Alexandria 85 So. 2d 276 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
1345 , , the Court of Appeal stated general rules governing controversies of this nature.
City of Natchitoches v. Kile 54 So. 2d 834 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Adams v. Town of Leesville 26 So. 2d 370 La. 1946
1346 , , the Louisiana Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Blanchard, held that * * * A departure in any material part from the plain terms of a statute authorizing local assessment will be fatal.” The above quoted minute entry indicates that in the closed session, the Board *114 made substantial alterations in the adver
Hinkle v. McGuire 182 So. 551 La. 1938
1345 , ; S. D. Moody & Co., Ltd. v. Spotorno, 112 La.
State v. Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana 178 So. 601 La. 1937
1345 , ; Town of Minden v. Glass, 132 La.
Lemoine v. Wheless Inv. Co. 159 So. 434 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
ing from a local assessment for street paving attaches to property of the abutting proprietor, without reference to the person in whom title is actually vested; and proceeding taken against same for the enforcement of such lien and pledge is one in rem, notwithstanding the title holder be cited for the purpose of carrying same into effect.” , 26 So.
City of Shreveport v. Curcio 157 So. 317 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Guaranty Mortgage & Securities Co. v. Millsaps 151 So. 197 La. 1933
Fresh & Oliveira v. City of New Orleans 126 So. 214 La. 1930
Apparently, the only Louisiana case, touching such guar anties, , 26 So.
Town of Ruston v. Adams 121 So. 661 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
447 ; Barber Asphalt Paving Co. vs. John Watt, , 26 So.
Board of Com'rs of Atchafalaya Basin Levee Dist. v. C. Lagarde Co. 120 So. 25 La. 1928
City of Shreveport v. Kansas City, S. & G. Ry. Co. 51 So. 648 La. 1910
Gurley v. City of New Orleans 50 So. 411 La. 1909
Bruning v. City of New Orleans 47 So. 624 La. 1908
That subsequent to the decision of the Supreme Court of this state in the Watt Case, , 26 South.
S. D. Moody & Co. v. Sewerage & Water Board 41 So. 649 La. 1906
After .this certificate had been issued by the city authorities, , 26 South.
Bacas v. Adler 36 So. 739 La. 1904
It was defective, but a new certificate was recorded while Edward Adler was the owner of the property, in order to conform with the decision of this court in the Watt Case, , 26 South.
Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. Howcott 33 So. 734 La. 1903