DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., 88 So. 723.

17 citing documents.

  • Horton v. Mobley 578 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
    765 (1922); Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Reilly v. State 533 So. 2d 1341 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
    See LRS 31:16; Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 so.
  • Anadarko Production Co. v. Caddo Parish Sch. Bd. 455 So. 2d 699 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
    See LRS 31:16, 27-61; Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Continental Group, Inc. v. Allison 379 So. 2d 1117 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1979
    Louis (to the Exposition ...)" Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., et al. , 88 So.
  • Leiter Minerals, Inc. v. California Co. 132 So. 2d 845 La. 1961
    623 ; Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Wise v. Watkins 62 So. 2d 653 La. 1952
    The defendants also rely on the holding in the case of Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Spears v. Nesbitt 2 So. 2d 650 La. 1941
    Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Vincent v. Bullock 187 So. 35 La. 1939
    * ” See, also, Article 3546 of the Revised Civil Code; Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Goldsmith v. McCoy 182 So. 519 La. 1938
    Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Ford v. Williams 179 So. 298 La. 1938
  • Frost Lumber Industries, Inc. v. Union Power Co. 162 So. 37 La. 1935
    predicates its claim of interruption' of prescription on the general rule set out in article 3520 of the Civil Code reading as follows: “Prescription ceases likewise to run whenever the debtor, or possessor, makes acknowledgment of the right of the person whose title they prescribed.” Defendant, in support of its claim, also-cites the cases of Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Gayoso Co. v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corporation 145 So. 677 La. 1933
    Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Company, , 88 So.
  • Myers v. Cooke 142 So. 790 La. 1932
    and as we understand it is conceded by the plaintiffs, that, if they had reserved the right to all instead of only a part of the minerals that might be produced from the lands which they sold to Shearer, their right would be barred or forfeited by the prescription of ten years, for nonuse, according to the line-up of decisions, commencing with Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Palmer Corporation of Louisiana v. Moore 132 So. 229 La. 1930
    Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Bodcaw Lumber Co. v. Magnolia Petroleum Co. 120 So. 389 La. 1929
    It is conceded by the plaintiff that it is settled by the repeated decisions of this .court, since the decision of the case of Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Lewis v. Bodcaw Lumber Co. 120 So. 859 La. 1929
    The district judge in this case cites the case of Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 So.
  • Sellington v. Producers' Oil Co. 92 So. 742 La. 1922
    * * * “A recognition of the right of servitude by the party owing it will interrupt prescription, which only begins to run again from that date, and must continue for 10 years from the date of the interruption before it is prescribed.” In Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Nabors Oil & Gas Co., , 88 South.