DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Tesoro v. Abate, 173 So. 196.

24 citing documents.

  • Jones v. Proctor 697 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    672 , (1942) (defective lock and door knob); (La.App.
  • Weiland v. King 262 So. 2d 50 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    at page 202 (La.App.1937), wherein it was stated that: “It is true that the jurisprudence of this state has broadened the language of articles 670 and 2322 of the Code to such an extent that the owner of a building practically insures any third person, rightfully on the premises, against injury caused by the vices o
  • Daniel v. Zurich Insurance 184 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
    329 (1906); , La.App., Orleans 1937 (writ refused).
  • Murphy v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York 165 So. 2d 497 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1964
    App., (Orleans, 1956); Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., (Orleans, 1937)."
  • Murphy v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York 138 So. 2d 132 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1962
    598 ; Green v. Billia, La.App., (Orleans, 1956); Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., (Orleans, 1937).
  • Malatesta v. Lowry 130 So. 2d 785 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1961
    103 ; Smith v. Hyman, *787 La.App., Roppolo v. Pick, La.App., ; Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., ; Hanover v. Brady, supra; Herbert v. Herrlitz, La.App., 146 So.
  • Matranga v. Hilman 94 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    App., ; Morris v. Hava, La.
  • Green v. Southern Furniture Company 94 So. 2d 508 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
  • Green v. Billa 86 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1956
    to a licensee or passerby is made to depend upon negligence, the mere fact that the building is defective is in itself proof of that negligence, *580 and this, whether the defect is apparent and easily discoverable, or is such as would not be noticed except upon careful inspection."'" Since the building in question was occupied by tenants, it is important to note that in Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., , we held that in such case even if the owner has no knowledge of the defect, nevertheless there is
  • Thiel v. Kern 34 So. 2d 296 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
    App., Heath v. Suburban Building and Loan Association et al., La.
  • Johnson v. Nichel 6 So. 2d 780 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    546 ; Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., ; Morris v. Hava, La.App., 180 So.
  • Smith v. Hyman 6 So. 2d 368 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    * * *" That rule is so well established that we need not discuss it further except to say that since the decision in the Heath case it has been reaffirmed in many others, notably Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., ; Staes v. Terranova, La.App., ; and Roppolo v. Pick, La.App., .
  • Lowe v. Home Owners' Loan Corporation 6 So. 2d 726 La. 1942
  • Ford v. Spiro 5 So. 2d 385 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    In Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., , we said: "A review of the foregoing authorities (excepting Hutchins v. Pick) demonstrates that, where an injury to a third person, rightfully on the leased premises, occurs, during the existence of the lease, by reason of a failure of the tenant to make repairs due by him under article 2716, the landlord or own
  • Wallace v. Meyer 4 So. 2d 784 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    546 ; Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., ; Morris v. Hava, La.App., 180 So.
  • Roppolo v. Pick 4 So. 2d 839 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1941
    546 ; Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., ; Morris v. Hava, La.App., 180 So.
  • Staes v. Terranova 4 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    267 , as follows: "`Although the liability of the house owner to a licensee or passerby is made to depend upon negligence, the mere fact that the building is defective is in itself proof of that negligence, and this, whether the defect is apparent and easily discoverable, or is such as would not be noticed except upon careful inspection.'" , 202 we said: "It is true that the jurisprudence of this state has broadened the language of articles 670 and 2322 of the Code to such an extent that the own
  • Hughes v. Abate 2 So. 2d 68 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    546 ; Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., ; Morris v. Hava, La.App., 180 So.
  • Lowe v. Home Owners' Loan Corporation 1 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    In Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., , we find facts remarkably similar to those now under consideration.
  • Coulton v. Caruso 195 So. 804 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
    See Revised Civil Code Articles 670, 2315 and 2322 and Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., .
  • Duplain v. Wiltz 194 So. 60 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
    Thereafter, in Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., , in which certiorari was also refused, we held that “a third person, may not rely upon articles 2693 and 2695 as a ground for recovery * * *.
  • Bradley v. Yancy 195 So. 110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
    912 ; Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., ; Heath v. Suburban Building & Loan Ass’n, La.App., 163 So.
  • Farve v. Danna 181 So. 823 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
  • Morris v. Hava 180 So. 216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
    546, 549 , we again said: *219 “If the lease is executed by the husband, then, under well-established jurisprudence, the wife does not occupy the status of tenant.” See, also, Tesoro v. Abate, La.App., , and Harris v. Tennis, 149 La.