Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Robert Gair Co. v. Columbia Rice Packing Co., 50 So. 8.

19 citing documents.

Greenleaf Plantation, Inc. v. Kieffer 403 So. 2d 100 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
[193] 194, ; Boudreaux v. Feibleman, 105 La.
Russ v. United Farm Equipment Co. 89 So. 2d 380 La. 1956
Trichel Contracting Co. v. Little Creek Oil Co. of Louisiana 84 So. 2d 874 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
[193] 194, ; Boudreaux v. Feibleman, 105 La.
Harrosh v. Fife Bros. Health Ass'n 1 So. 2d 323 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
[193], 194, ; Boudreaux v. Feibleman, 105 La.
Labatt v. Louisiana Adjustment Bureau, Inc. 185 So. 702 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
[193] 194, ; Boudreaux v. Feibleman, 105 La.
Proctor v. Opelousas Ins. Agency, Inc. 158 So. 627 La. 1934
Daly v. Opelousas Ins. Agency, Inc. 158 So. 631 La. 1934
Administrators of Tulane Educational Fund v. B. G. Carbajal, Inc. 156 So. 416 La. 1934
194 , ; Boudreaux v. Feibleman, 105 La.
Exchange Nat. Bank v. Waldron Lumber Co. 150 So. 3 La. 1933
Beneficial Loan Soc. of New Orleans v. Strauss 148 So. 85 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
161, 162 , it was held (syllabus): “Mercantile corporation held not estopped to repudiate unauthorized withdrawal of funds from depositary bank by manager of branch store, where similar previous withdrawals were not proved, and corporation immediately wrote bank repudiáting manager’s act.” , 50 So.
Corbin v. Southern States Packing Co. 141 So. 523 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
Scharfenstein & Sons, Inc. v. Item Co. 141 So. 463 La. 1932
194 , ; Boudreaux v. Feibleman, 105 La.
Stephens v. Brackin 134 So. 326 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
“Plaintiff ch.es the case of Gair Co. v. Columbia Rice Packing Company, Limited, , 50 So.
Clarke Garage Co. v. Rosenberg 128 So. 62 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
Cook v. Ruston Oil Mills & Fertilizer Co. 127 So. 347 La. 1930
198 , , has been cited as laying down a different rule.
Harris v. H. C. Talton Wholesale Grocery Co. 123 So. 480 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
194 , ; Boudreaux v. Feibleman, 105 La.
Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. v. Aleman Planting & Mfg. Co. 117 So. 554 La. 1928
7, p. 761.” See, also, Robert Gair Co. v. Columbia Rice Packing Co., Ltd., , 50 So.
Haas v. S. Gumbel & Co. 99 So. 350 La. 1924
Interstate Trust & Banking Co. v. Reynolds 53 So. 520 La. 1910
Ct. 1173, 1180] 41 L. Ed. 265 , speaking through Mr. Chief Justice Puller: ‘A contract, made by a corporation, beyond the scope of its powers, expressed or implied, on a proper construction of its charter, cannot be enforced or rendered enforceable by the application of the doctrine of estoppel.’ ” , 50 South.