DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Augusta Sugar Co. v. Haley, 112 So. 731.

16 citing documents.

  • Turner v. Marine Inland Transportation Co. 7 So. 3d 756 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • Isaac v. Benson Chevrolet Co. 885 So. 2d 38 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    280, 281 (1941); , 112 So.
  • James v. Formosa Plastics Corp. of La. 813 So. 2d 335 La. 2002
    280, 281 (1941); , 112 So.
  • Barber v. Bozeman 577 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    a period of five years, to take any step in the "prosecution or defense" of a case, (emphasis added) It is well accepted under the jurisprudence that "a step in the prosecution or defense" of a suit requires something more than a passive effort to keep a suit on the docket of the court, and requires a formal move or action before the court intended to hasten judgment, , 112 So.
  • Pounds v. Yancy 224 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    Augusta Sugar Co., , 112 So.
  • Tucker v. New Orleans Laundries, Inc. 145 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
  • Washington v. Harvey 124 So. 2d 240 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1960
    Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v. Edrington, 11 Orleans App. 288; , 112 So.
  • Sanders v. Luke 92 So. 2d 156 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    Augusta Sugar Co., , at page 816, 112 So.
  • Reagor v. First National Life Insurance Company 85 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    Prefatory to the above quoted declaration the opinion in the cited case also quoted from the holding in Augusta Sugar Co., *315 , 112 So.
  • Green v. Small 79 So. 2d 497 La. 1955
  • Watt v. Creppel 67 So. 2d 341 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    In Augusta Sugar Co. v. Haley, 1927, , 112 So.
  • Sliman v. Araguel 200 So. 280 La. 1941
    “A step in the prosecution of a suit, within the meaning of Act 107 of 1898, requires some formal move before the Court, intended to hasten the judgment.” In the case of Augusta Sugar Co., Ltd., v. Haley, , 112 So.
  • Bell v. Staring 170 So. 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
    Augusta Sugar Co., Ltd., v. Haley et al., , 112 So.
  • Landry v. Dore 149 So. 321 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1933
  • King v. Illinois Cent. R. Co. 143 So. 95 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1932
    929 .” In the case of Augusta Sugar Co., Ltd., v. Haley et al., , 112 So.
  • Cocke v. Cavalier 143 So. 33 La. 1932
    Counsel for defendant, plaintiff in rule, , 112 So.