Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Albert Hanson Lumber Co. v. Baldwin Lumber Co., 52 So. 537.

15 citing documents.

Distinguished Bessie L. Otwell v. Diversified Timber Services, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
he trial court’s finding regarding the number of trees marked is supported, in part, by the testimony of Mr. Moffett, who stated that there was “paint on everything,” not only by the borders but also “everywhere else.” Considering the number of trees involved and Mr. Sanders’ other activities on the property, we find the case cited by Defendants, So.
Distinguished Otwell v. Diversified Timber Services, Inc. 896 So. 2d 222 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
Considering the number of trees involved and Mr. Sanders' other activities on the property, we find the case cited by Defendants, , 52 So.
Broussard v. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co. 164 So. 2d 84 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
898 ; Hanson Lumber Co. v. Baldwin Lumber *95 Co., , 52 So.
Wischer v. Madison Realty Co. 146 So. 2d 819 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
City of New Orleans v. Peterson 142 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Mount Pleasant Primitive Baptist Church v. Zion Hill Missionary Baptist Church 126 So. 2d 852 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
" ‘The possession necessary to a possessory action it was said in Albert Hanson Lumber Co., Ltd., v. Baldwin Lumber Co., Ltd., , 52 So.
La Caze v. Boycher 80 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
Thus, a mere survey of boundary lines where they are not plainly and permanently marked does not constitute open and apparent possession, , 52 So.
Southern Advance Bag & Paper Co. v. Broomfield 73 So. 2d 510 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
“The possession necessary to a pos-sessory action it was said in Albert Hanson Lumber Co., Ltd., v. Baldwin Lumber Co., Ltd., , 52 So.
Forrest v. Messenger 20 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
[5] The possession necessary to a possessory action, it was said in Albert Hanson Lumber Company, Ltd., v. Baldwin Lumber Company, Ltd., , 52 So.
Scott v. Brown Paper Mill Co. 174 So. 212 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
Vidrine v. Vidrine 130 So. 244 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
Frost Lumber Industries, Inc. v. Bluford 128 So. 711 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
In Hanson Lumber Co. vs. Baldwin Lumber Co., , 52 So.
Pierson v. Shepherd 6 La. App. 333 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
357 ; Albert Hansen Lumber Co. vs. Baldwin Lumber Co., , 52 South.
Albert Hanson Lumber Co. v. Mestayer 58 So. 511 La. 1912
Albert Hanson Lumber Co. v. Riggs Cypress Co. 58 So. 567 La. 1911