Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Waterhouse v. Star Land Co., 71 So. 358.

27 citing documents.

Richland Parish Police Jury v. Debnam 968 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Schexnayder v. Gish 948 So. 2d 1259 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Short v. Jones 457 So. 2d 201 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Curry v. Iberville Parish Sheriff's Office 378 So. 2d 159 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Reporter's Comment (b) 5, LSA-CCP art. 927; , 71 So.
Price v. Price 326 So. 2d 545 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
Invest, Incorporated v. State 247 So. 2d 175 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Noel v. Noel 244 So. 2d 73 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Reporter’s Comment (b) 5, LSA-CCP art. 927; , 71 So.
All State Credit Plan Houma, Inc. v. Weidenbacher 234 So. 2d 774 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
It is proper to hear testimony on an exception of no right of action ( , 71 So.
Langley v. Copolymer Rubber & Chemical Corp. 233 So. 2d 353 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
null and void on the grounds that the surveyor had not given legal notice of his action in establishing boundaries, the defendant having filed exceptions of no cause of action and no right of action, which were sustained after testimony of the surveyor was entered, we held: “While we agree that it is proper to hear testimony on an exception of no right of action, , 71 So.
Bielkiewicz v. Rudisill 201 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
Scott v. Ware 160 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1964
194 ; Waterhouse v. Star Land Co., Limited, et al., , 71 So.
Cattle Farms, Inc. v. Abercrombie 155 So. 2d 426 La. 1963
We find nothing in Waterhouse v. Star Land Company, Limited, et al., , 71 So.
Chrysler Corporation v. City of New Orleans 145 So. 2d 11 La. 1962
783 ; Waterhouse v. Star Land Co., Ltd., , 71 So.
Johnston v. City of New Orleans 101 So. 2d 206 La. 1958
661 , Ann.Cas.1914A, 1073; , 71 So.
Prince v. Hopson 89 So. 2d 128 La. 1956
In Waterhouse v. Star Land Co., Ltd., , 71 So.
Succession of Alstock 88 So. 2d 14 La. 1956
661 ; Waterhouse v. Star Land Co., Ltd., , 71 So.
Klein v. Connell 71 So. 2d 366 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
In this case we said: “ , 71 So.
Vegas v. Cheramie 69 So. 2d 66 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
While we agree that it is proper to hear testimony on an exception of no right of action, , 71 So.
Ritsch Alluvial Land Co. v. Adema 30 So. 2d 753 La. 1947
Jackson v. Gordon 186 So. 399 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1939
State Ex Rel. Adema v. Meraux 184 So. 825 La. 1938
Bickham v. Pitts 171 So. 80 La. 1936
They also say that it was error for the district judge to refer the exception of no cause of action to the merits, , 71 So.
Ideal Savings & Homestead Ass'n v. Scott 160 So. 783 La. 1935
1914A, 1073, the court said: “The principle that one without pecuniary, interest has no judicial standing runs all through our jurisprudence; it is founded upon simple plain common sense; it is formulated in article 15 of the Code of Practice.” , 71 So.
Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills v. Fernandez 159 So. 339 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
Ann. 98 ; Waterhouse v. Star Land Co., Ltd., , 71 So.
Tichenor v. Dr. G. H. Tichenor's Antiseptic Co. 156 So. 194 La. 1934
no judicial standing runs all through our jurisprudence; it is founded upon simple plain common sense; it is formulated in article 15 of the Code of Practice, reading, ‘An action can only be brought by one having a real and actual interest which he pursues’; and it has been enforced by this court in a very large number of cases.” , 71 So.
Evans v. Eureka Grand Lodge 149 So. 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
Succession of Dill 98 So. 752 La. 1923