Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite A. Baldwin & Co. v. McCain, 106 So. 459.
-
Griffin v. Bank of Abbeville & Trust Co.
69 So. 2d 153
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
583 ; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Tucker v. Woodside
50 So. 2d 814
La. 1951
A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
- State v. Pitre 38 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1949
-
Torres v. Serpas
20 So. 2d 416
La. 1944
Const, art. 7, § 10; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
State v. Cook
3 So. 2d 114
La. 1941
583 ; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Frierson v. Cooper
199 So. 388
La. 1940
387 ; and Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Baker v. Duson
188 So. 40
La. 1939
The phrase, 'the amount in dispute,’ as here used in the Constitution, includes, within its meaning, the value of the thing in contest, where a thing, instead of an amount, is in dispute.” A., Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Perryman v. Trimble
170 So. 253
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
It has been frequently held that where no pecuniary amount is in dispute, the value of the thing or object in controversy determines appellate jurisdiction (A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Noel Estate, Inc. v. Louisiana Oil Refining Corp.
170 So. 272
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
The above-mentioned phrase, “the amount in dispute,” according to the Supreme Court in the case of A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Gaillardanne v. Locascio
162 So. 69
La. 1935
820 ; Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Hanover Fire Ins. Co. v. Southern Amusement Co.
146 So. 316
La. 1933
583 ; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Chickasaw Wood Products Co. v. Vail-Donaldson Co.
136 So. 87
La. 1931
583 ; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Givens v. Yazoo M.V.R. Co.
137 So. 66
La. 1931
583 ; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
Steeg Printing & Publishing Co. v. Auto Lec Stores, Inc.
134 So. 746
La. 1931
583 ; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.
-
City of New Orleans, by Public Belt Railroad Commission, v. New Orleans Coal & Bisso Towboat Co.
123 So. 724
La. 1929
583; A. Baldwin & , 106 So.