Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Adsit v. Park, 81 So. 430.

37 citing documents.

Sunset Harbour, LLC v. Howard Anthony Brown La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
Larto Lake, LLC v. Sit General Partner, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
As the court in Lewis explained, “[t]he requirement that the tax collector take additional reasonable steps to notify a delinquent taxpayer is a long-standing principle.” Lewis, 925 So.2d at 1178; 81 So.
Allied Tax Fund, L.L.C. v. Chin Hong Bow & Co. 155 So. 3d 524 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
“[N]otice is a constitutional requirement, and want of notice is fatal to a tax sale.” Id., pp. 8-9, 925 So.2d at 1177 ( , 81 So.
Brookewood Investment Co. v. Sixty-Three Twenty-Four Chef Menteur Highway L.L.C. 108 So. 3d 329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
6 “In sum, notice is a constitutional requirement, and want of notice is *333 17fatal to a tax sale.” Lewis v. Succession of Johnson, 05-1192, p. 8 (La.4/4/06), ( , 81 So.
Smitko v. Gulf South Shrimp, Inc. 94 So. 3d 750 La. 2012
In Lewis , we emphasized Inthe principle that “notice is a constitutional requirement, and want of notice is fatal to a tax sale.” Lewis , 05-1192, pp. 8-9, 925 So.2d at 1177 ( , 81 So.
C & C Energy, L.L.C. v. Cody Investments, L.L.C. 41 So. 3d 1134 La. 2010
We clearly emphasized the principle that “notice is a constitutional requirement, and want 18of notice is fatal to a tax sale.” Id., pp. 8-9, 925 So.2d at 1177 ( , 81 So.
Sutter v. Dane Investments, Inc. 985 So. 2d 1263 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
Lewis v. Succession of Johnson, 05-1192, p. 8 (La.4/4/06) ( citing, , 144 La.
Lewis v. Succession of Johnson 925 So. 2d 1172 La. 2006
Gabriel Lewis, Jr. v. Succession of Matthew Johnson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
Lewis v. Succession of Johnson 900 So. 2d 1114 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
Berry v. Captain 360 So. 2d 651 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Nipper v. Ferguson 148 So. 2d 316 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Robertson v. Polmer 112 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
Robinson v. Mafrige 86 So. 2d 72 La. 1956
Thurmon v. Hogg 72 So. 2d 500 La. 1954
Doll v. Montgomery 58 So. 2d 573 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1952
Prampin v. Southern Chemical Works 53 So. 2d 210 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Sanders v. Abbitt 29 So. 2d 718 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
The Supreme Court in the cited case, in support of the doctrine and principle therein announced, , 81 So.
Splane v. Tubre 6 So. 2d 361 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
The failure to give notice to the co-owners renders the sale null and void under the plain provisions of the law and numerous decisions of the courts, , 81 So.
Le Blanc v. Babin 2 So. 2d 225 La. 1941
Under these circumstances, and because cases of this character are frequently distinguished from each other by the facts disclosed, we deem it advisable to leave the other issues presented by the pleadings for future consideration in the event of a second appeal.” , at pages 942 and 943, 81 So.
Gottlieb v. Babin 2 So. 2d 218 La. 1941
Ideal Savings & Homestead Ass'n v. Yochim 155 So. 258 La. 1934
Barthold v. Dover 153 So. 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Mire v. La Salle Realty Co. 146 So. 326 La. 1933
Federico v. Nunez 139 So. 18 La. 1931
Lee v. Givens 134 So. 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
937 , ; Jones v. Curran, supra.
Page v. Pitts 133 So. 460 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
Hodges v. Kranz 120 So. 677 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1929
“But the rulings of the court have been consistent in this, that a sale of property for delinquent taxes is invalid if the Tax Collector has failed to comply with the requirements of the law for giving notice to the tax debtor, and if in consequence, the tax debtor did not have notice previous to the sale.” Adsit vs. Park et al., , 81 So.
Bush v. Baham 121 So. 628 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
937 , , and Wilkerson vs. Wyche, 158 La.
Hawkins v. Shutt 8 La. App. 101 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
“Notice of tax delinquency must be given to him who is the owner of the delinquent property at the time the notice is issued.” Adsit vs. Park, , 81 So.
Byrne v. Commercial Security Co. 7 La. App. 667 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
39 ; Adsit vs. Park, , 81 South.
Kivlen v. Horvath 113 So. 140 La. 1927
Hicks & Richardson Co. v. Gearreald 6 La. App. 233 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1927
892 ; Adsit vs. Park, , 81 South.
Marque v. Kolwe 5 La. App. 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
937 , ; Bradley vs. City of New Orleans, 153 La.
Avery v. Mayo 109 So. 393 La. 1926
Pierson v. Castell Land & Harbor Co. 105 So. 274 La. 1925
Wilkerson v. Wyche 104 So. 381 La. 1925
934, , wherein it was said: *599 “With regard to ‘giving notice' to the delinquent in the manner to be provided by law,’ article 233 of the Constitution of 1898 and of 1913 corresponds with article 210 of the Constitution of 1879, except that the latter contained a proviso that the manner of giving the notice should not be