Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Henry Block Co. v. Papania, 46 So. 694.

22 citing documents.

Jones v. Butler 346 So. 2d 790 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
T. E. Mixon Lumber Co. v. Boutte 191 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
682 , (1908) ; Hotard v. Fleitas, Inc., (Orl.App., 1953); W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Thrasher, 153 So.
Duncan v. Roane 127 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
Henry Block Co. v. Papania, 1908, , 46 So.
United Carbon Company v. Mississippi River Fuel Corp. 89 So. 2d 209 La. 1956
Hotard v. Fleitas, Inc. 67 So. 2d 345 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
This, we think, is recognized by the Supreme Court in Henry Block Co., , 46 So.
Brown v. Succession of Laing 26 So. 2d 34 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
The following cases sustain this conclusion: Henry Block Company, , 46 So.
Succession of Thompson 194 So. 433 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
322 ; Henry Block Co., Ltd., v. Papania, , 46 So.
Cook v. Crow 194 So. 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
White Bros. Co. v. Shinn 160 So. 823 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
American Furniture Co., Inc. v. Patterson 157 So. 174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Becker v. Hollywood Theatre 155 So. 522 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1934
W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Thrasher 153 So. 719 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Succession of Spann 125 So. 289 La. 1929
322 ; Henry Block Co., L’td., v. Papania, , 46 So.
Holmes Co. v. Hiller 7 La. App. 590 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
On a writ of review, Block vs. Papania, .
Paine v. Todd 6 La. App. 528 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
376 ; Block Co. vs. Papania, , 46 South.
Dendinger, Inc. v. Royal Indemnity Co. 5 La. App. 302 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1926
But plaintiff pleads an interruption of prescription by a verbal promise to pay under the authority of Block vs. Papania, , 46 South.
Bennett-Brewer Hardware Co. v. Wakeman 107 So. 286 La. 1926
e prescription of 3 years, except that, after the word “acknowledged,” the Legislature has, by the Act 78 of 1888, added the words “in writing.” I submit, therefore, that there is no warrant or reason whatever for this court to say that the word “ceases,” in article 3538 of the Code, does not mean “is interrupted.” I concede that it was so thought by the Court of- Appeal, , 46 So.
Bennett-Brewer Hardware Co. v. Wakeman 2 La. App. 376 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
The identical question here raised was raised and settled in the case of Henry Block Co., Ltd., vs. Papania, , 46 South.
Harper v. Barton 2 La. App. 317 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
These are: Block vs. Papania, , 46 South.
Sentell v. Woods 2 La. App. 343 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
Block vs. Papania, , 46 South.
Harman v. Legrande 91 So. 726 La. 1922
See Henry Block & , 46 South.
State v. Swindall 56 So. 702 La. 1911