DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Broussard v. Cormier, 98 So. 403.

18 citing documents.

  • Red River v. Noles 406 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
    The Supreme Court again considered the subject in 1923, , 98 So.
  • Terrebonne Parish Police Jury v. Matherne 405 So. 2d 314 La. 1981
  • David v. Dixie Rice Agricultural Corp. 379 So. 2d 62 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
  • Cole v. Mott 351 So. 2d 1326 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
  • Poole v. Guste 262 So. 2d 339 La. 1972
  • Long v. Childress 255 So. 2d 822 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
  • Poole v. Guste 246 So. 2d 353 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
  • Pearce v. Gunter 221 So. 2d 599 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
  • Distinguished Wild v. LeBlanc 191 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
    As the issues are framed by the present pleadings, we cannot consider whatever merit there may be to the defendant's interpretation of Article 660, see Planiol, Civil Law Treatise, Volume 1, Section 2903 (LSLI Translation, 1959), or whatever difficulties to it may be suggested by contrary expressions in the decisions of perhaps distinguishable facts, , 98 So.
  • Gamburg v. City of Alexandria 85 So. 2d 276 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
  • Harris v. Pierce 73 So. 2d 330 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
  • Godchaux Sugars, Inc. v. Ockman 68 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1953
    uit involved a “real right.” The court said: “There cannot be doubt that the right which plaintiff seeks to enforce is a real right as distinguished from a personal right, whether the demand has as its object the protection of plaintiff’s rights in the real estate owned by him, or whether the action is in the nature of an action of boundary (articles 11 and 12, C.P.; Broussard v. Cormier, et al., , 98 So.
  • Cornett v. Hebert 31 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
  • Baton Rouge Bldg. Trades Council v. T. L. James & Co. 10 So. 2d 606 La. 1942
  • Prescott v. Prescott 141 So. 88 La. 1932
    We think the following cases support this conclusion: , 98 So.
  • Stephens v. Jones 129 So. 555 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
    There cannot be doubt that the right which plaintiff seeks to enforce is a real right as distinguished from a personal right, whether the demand has as its object the protection of plaintiff’s rights in the real estate owned by him, or whether the action is in the nature of an action of boundary (articles 11 and 12, C. P; , 98 So.
  • Town of Leesville v. Kapotsky 122 So. 59 La. 1929
  • Louisiana Irrigation & Mill Co. v. Sixth Ward Drainage Dist. 104 So. 623 La. 1925