Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Latham v. Glasscock, 108 So. 100.

18 citing documents.

  • Munsterman v. Crawford 532 So. 2d 264 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
  • Tucker v. Kelly 506 So. 2d 730 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • LaHaye v. Canon 320 So. 2d 264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
    In the case of Latham, , 108 So.
  • Lang v. Fornea 135 So. 2d 643 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
  • Davis v. Lewis & Lewis 60 So. 2d 230 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    10, No. 4, p. 527; , 108 So.
  • Martin v. Carroll 59 So. 2d 158 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
  • Sun Oil Co. v. Smith 43 So. 2d 148 La. 1949
  • Johnston v. Burton 11 So. 2d 513 La. 1942
    Since all of the heirs were not made parties to the partition proceedings, the judge of the district court was correct in resolving that the judgment was an absolute nullity (See Kelley v. Kelliher, supra, , 108 So.
  • Amerada Petroleum Corporation v. Reese 196 So. 558 La. 1940
  • State v. Treigle 192 So. 152 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1939
  • Klotz v. Tru-Fruit Distributors 173 So. 592 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
  • Stoma v. Smith 172 So. 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
    Rev.Civ.Code, art. 1412; , 108 So.
  • Riley v. Washington 161 So. 896 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1935
  • Powell v. Larance 155 So. 13 La. 1934
    1097 , , 102: “A judgment rendered in a partition suit against a person not cited is a nullity as to him, and a sale made under such judgment *757 is void as to the person not cited, and all other parties to the proceedings are relieved, ‘for the partition cannot subsist for one, and be annulled for another.’ Rev. Civ.
  • A. Baldwin & Co. v. Le Long 142 So. 879 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1932
    1090 , , the court said: “ ‘It is well settled that, where property has been seized under a writ of fieri facias before the return day, the sheriff may retain the writ and sell the property after the time fixed for its return.’ “Citing Labiche v. Lewis, 12 Rob.
  • Nelson v. Coppage 128 So. 529 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
  • Wright v. Melder 125 So. 765 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
    699 , 701; Latham et al. vs. Glasscock, , 108 South.
  • Green v. Barnett 120 So. 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929