DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Iberia Cypress Co. v. Von Schoeler, 46 So. 105.

16 citing documents.

  • Guillory v. Hebert 31 So. 3d 1097 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Iberia Cypress Co., Limited, v. Von Schoeler, , 46 So.
  • Truelove v. Easley 521 So. 2d 1229 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
    The reason given for this exception is that the usual rule—that the measure of recovery is the difference between the value of the thing sold in its defective condition and its value as warranted ( , 46 So.
  • Verbick v. RGC Investments, Inc. 477 So. 2d 858 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
    Iberia Cypress Co., , 46 So.
  • Bustamante v. Manale 397 So. 2d 842 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
    The reason given for this exception is that the usual rule—that the measure of recovery is the difference between the value of the thing sold in its defective condition and its value as warranted ( , 46 So.
  • Fitzmorris v. Kelly 152 So. 2d 36 La. 1963
    The reason given for this exception is that the usual rule— that the measure of recovery is the difference between the value of the thing sold in its defective condition and its value as' warranted ( , 46 So.
  • Delta Equipment & Construction Co. v. Cook 142 So. 2d 427 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
  • Lemonier v. Coco 130 So. 2d 414 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
  • Lemonier v. Coco 112 So. 2d 436 La. 1959
    Iberia Cypress Co., , 46 So.
  • Perkins v. Chatry 58 So. 2d 349 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
  • Nelson v. M. C. M. Truck Lines 25 So. 2d 236 La. 1946
  • Morehouse Ice Co. v. Tooke & Reynolds 154 So. 402 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
  • Phillip Werlein, Ltd. v. Glick 154 So. 492 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
    Code, art. 2541; , 46 So.
  • Louisiana Iron & Supply Co. v. Galloway 6 La. App. 218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
    Ann. 894 ; Iberia Cypress Co. vs. Van Scholtin, , 46 South.
  • Johness v. Jahncke, Inc. 4 La. App. 544 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1926
    App.; Iberia Cypress Co. vs. Von Schoeler, , 6 South.
  • Pere v. Dalgarn 3 La. App. 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1926
    ht'of redhibition or of returning the thing sold to the vendor and demand the avoidance of the sale and the restitution of the price paid by him; or 2nd He may retain the thing sold and demand a diminution of the price to the extent that the defects have diminished the value of the thing sold, which is called the action quanti minoris.” G. C. 2541 *778 (2519); Iberia Cypress Co. vs. Von Schoeler, , 46 South.
  • Bernin v. Guarino 5 Pelt. 210 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1921
    (75); 13 A. 229 ; 7 A. 243 ; 6 A. 442 ; 5 A. 35 ; 9 R. 352 ; 5 R. 217 ; 17 La.