Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Shelly v. Friedrichs, 42 So. 218.

17 citing documents.

Parquet v. Parquet 141 So. 2d 444 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1962
Bennett v. Hernandez 128 So. 2d 472 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
Morris v. Hankins 188 So. 155 La. 1939
Roberts v. Medlock 148 So. 474 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1933
Progressive Realty Co. v. Levenberg 149 So. 444 La. 1933
Progressive Realty Co. v. Levenberg 149 So. 444 La. 1933
Marque v. Kolwe 5 La. App. 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
Stockbridge v. Martin 4 La. App. 410 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1926
767 , the court said:q “It is of the essence of such a sale that there should have been an assessement.” And in that ease it was specifically held that— “Where there has been no sale Article 233 of the Constitution establishing the prescription of three years against attacks on sales has no application.” Shelly vs. Friedrichs, , 42 South.
Brott v. New Orleans Land Co. 91 So. 653 La. 1922
Defendant contends that this court decided that the Alpuentp grant should be so located, , 42 South.
Schwartzenberg v. Schwartzenberg 70 So. 230 La. 1915
Amrhein v. Nylka Land Co. 68 So. 957 La. 1915
Brock v. E. McIlhenny' Son 67 So. 951 La. 1915
Lemle v. Louisiana Farm Land Co. 66 So. 185 La. 1914
1021 , the plaintiffs were recognized as the owners of other .parts of the property described in this petition; , 42 South.
Guillory v. Elms 52 So. 767 La. 1910
Castera's Heirs v. New Orleans Land Co. 51 So. 1021 La. 1910
The contention of defendant is that the *879 foregoing plan includes the squares 915, 916, 931, 932, 933, 934, 935, 936, and 937, as a , 42 South.
Lacroix v. Meyers 7 Teiss. 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1910
Head v. Howcott Land Co. 44 So. 117 La. 1907