Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hoffmann v. Ackermann, 35 So. 293.

22 citing documents.

Steven Paul Pesson v. Heather Dieterich La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
549, 551 (1926), or a creditor of the alleged vendee, 35 So.
Mitchell v. Clark 448 So. 2d 681 La. 1984
549, 551 (1926), or a creditor of the alleged vendee, , 35 So.
Marchand v. Estate of Loga 354 So. 2d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Gordon v. Culbertson 296 So. 2d 401 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Little v. Haik 163 So. 2d 558 La. 1964
678 (1876); Hoffman v. Ackermann (on rehearing) , 35 So.
Childers v. Hudson 65 So. 2d 131 La. 1953
Pattison v. Bryan 26 So. 2d 778 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1946
McGinty v. Wilkerson 3 So. 2d 456 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
Succession of Hogh 190 So. 399 La. 1939
Jackson v. Dominick 166 So. 867 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
Succession of Walsh 131 So. 214 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
Freed Realty Co. v. Singer 5 La. App. 551 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
220 ; Hoffmann vs. Ackermann, , 35 So.
Eberle v. Eberle 108 So. 549 La. 1926
Walton v. Walton 100 So. 786 La. 1924
448 .” In the opinion from which we have quoted the Judge considered plaintiffs’ contention that under article 2239, O. C., the heirs of Thomas Walton are in a better position than he would be if he was living and had brought this suit, , 35 South.
Bernheim v. Pessou 79 So. 23 La. 1917
On this point the evidence leaves no room for doubt; but it consists wholly of parol, and the learned counsel for plaintiff contend that a purchase of real estate which appears by the written evidence of the sale to have been made to one person cannot be shown by parol to have been made in reality by or for another person, , 35 South.
Hanby v. Texas Co. 72 So. 933 La. 1916
Succession of Block 68 So. 618 La. 1915
Cambre's Widow v. Lasseigne 63 So. 680 La. 1913
Lyons v. Lawrence 43 So. 51 La. 1907
In the next decision cited ( , 35 South.
Barrow v. Grant's Estate 41 So. 220 La. 1906
City of Shreveport v. Youree 38 So. 135 La. 1905
Ackerman v. Peters 36 So. 923 La. 1904