Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite H. T. Cottam & Co. v. Moises, 88 So. 916.

14 citing documents.

Lowry v. Decks & Tapes, Inc. 415 So. 2d 632 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
See H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Benglis Sash & Door Co. v. Leonards 387 So. 2d 1171 La. 1980
Lanier Business Products, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank 388 So. 2d 442 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
See H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Johnson v. Colonial Buick, Inc. 334 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Dufrene v. Tracy 94 So. 2d 297 La. 1957
264 ; H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Guzzo v. Liggio 69 So. 2d 357 La. 1953
264 ; H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Mossy Motors v. McRedmond 12 So. 2d 719 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
Wolfe v. Sample 141 So. 812 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
6, p. 896, under tbe beading “Contracts—Time of Performance,” we find that tbe jurisprudence is practically uniform to the effect that “a reasonable time for performance is implied in a contract wbicb expressed no time for performance.” In H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Claude Neon Federal Co. v. Four Hundred Club 134 So. 445 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
469 ; H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Haskins Trading Co. v. S. Pfeifer & Co. 130 So. 469 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
“When no time is specified for delivery of goods, a reasonable time is understood.” H. T. Cottam & , 88 So.
Shushan Bros. & Co. v. Vilensky 124 So. 562 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
The measure of damages for the breach of an executory contract of sale of movables by the buyer is the difference between the contract price and the market price (H. T. Cottam & Co. vs. Moises, , 88 So.
Leon Godchaux Clothing Co. v. De Buys 120 So. 539 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1929
C. C. 1934 and 2555, H. T. Cottam & Co. vs. Moises, , 88 So.
Adler Export Co. v. Eagle Rice & Feed Mills, Inc. 119 So. 551 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
Ann. 352 ; *121 H. T. Cottam & Co. vs. Moises, , 88 So.
David M. Davis & Co. v. Sherman 1 La. App. 105 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1924
The vendor, on buyer’s refusal to accept delivery, may sell at private sale, for market value, and recover from buyer the difference between the price so obtained and the contract price.” 30 La Ann. 264, Barthy vs. N. O. See also Cottam & Company vs. Moises, .