DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, 176 So. 415.

18 citing documents.

  • University Prop. Corp. v. Fidelity Nat. Bank 500 So. 2d 888 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    [2] (Orleans 1937), the debtor borrowed $300 from the creditor and executed a promissory note secured by a chattel mortgage *895 on his automobile.
  • Gulf National Bank at Lake Charles v. Ryan 432 So. 2d 1122 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    405 at page 408; (Orl.App.1937); Southland Investment Company, Inc. v. Motor Sales Com p any, supra.
  • Ford Motor Credit Company v. Soileau 323 So. 2d 221 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
    405 at page 408; (Orl.App.
  • Exchange National Bank of Chicago v. Spalitta 321 So. 2d 338 La. 1975
    Corporation v. Hulett, La.App., (1963); David Investment Co. v. Wright, La.App., (1956); Futch v. Gregory, La.App., (1949); Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App., (1937).
  • Powell v. Motors Insurance Corporation 235 So. 2d 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
    In that case, and Southland Investment Company, Inc. v. Lofton, 194 So.
  • Orgeron v. Griffin 230 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
    and Shreveport Auto Finance Co. v. Harrington, (La.App.)
  • Bourgeois v. Sazdoff 209 So. 2d 320 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1968
    Carr v. Lattier, La.App., ; Gumina v. Dupas, La.App., ; Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Dixon, La.App., ; David Investment Company v. Wright, La.App., ; Soileau v. Pitre, La.App., ; Simmons v. Clark, La.App., ; Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App., .
  • Wall v. McKean 205 So. 2d 482 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    aged automobile (even though at the suggestion of the mortgagor) was held nevertheless not to present application of the Deficiency Judgment Act.” See also Atlas Finance Corp. v. Whitehead, La.App., ; Soileau v. Pitre, La.App., ; Liberal Finance Corp. v. Washington, La.App., ; Farmer v. Smith, La.App., ; Home Finance Service v. Wambley, La.App., ; Carr v. Lattier, La.App., .
  • Liberty Loan Corp. of Lafayette v. Jobe 203 So. 2d 723 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App., ; Farmer v. Smith, La.App., .
  • Pearson v. Kahey 160 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    and Shreveport Auto Finance Co. v. Harrington, [La.App.]
  • Atlas Finance Corporation v. Whitehead 99 So. 2d 481 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    [2] David Investment Company v. Wright, La.App.1956, ; Soileau v. Pitre, La.App.1955, ; Liberal Finance Corp. v. Washington, La.App.1953, ; Farmer v. Smith, La.App.1952, ; Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App.1937, .
  • Wilson v. Brian 81 So. 2d 142 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1955
    Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App., ; Southland Inv.
  • Soileau v. Pitre 79 So. 2d 628 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    In Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App., , the provisions of these statutes were applied to the factual situation wherein the mortgagor has surrendered the mortgaged property to the mortgagee for a private sale without appraisement the proceeds of the sale to be applied to the amount of the mortgage.
  • The Farmerville Bank v. Scheen 76 So. 2d 581 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1954
    it was held by the Orleans Court of Appeal in an opinion by Judge McCaleb, now associate justice of the Supreme Court, that a mortgagee's suit for the balance due on a note secured by mortgage, after crediting proceeds of a private sale of the mortgaged property, without appraisal, pursuant to a collateral contract
  • Simmons v. Clark 64 So. 2d 520 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    The above-quoted Deficiency Judgment Act was the basis of the decisions in the cases of Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App., , and Southland Investment Company, Inc. v. Lofton, La.
  • Liberal Finance Corp. v. Washington 62 So. 2d 545 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    Assuming arguendo, a view most favorable to the plaintiff, that they did have the consent -of .defendant to take possession of the automobile and resell it, plaintiff still cannot recover on the note for the reason that the doctrine expressed in the cases of Home Finance Service v. Walmsley, La.App., ; Southland Investments, Inc. v. Lofton, La.App., 194 So.
  • Futch v. Gregory 40 So. 2d 830 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
    decided by the Orleans Court of Appeal, and Southland Investment Company, Inc., v. Lofton, 194 So.
  • Southland Inv. Co. v. Lofton 194 So. 125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
    We assume, from the statement in plaintiff’s brief, .