Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Taylor v. Williams, 110 So. 100.

24 citing documents.

Estate of Bradford v. Thomas 700 So. 2d 1030 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Guidry v. Dufrene 687 So. 2d 1044 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
1979) on rehearing; , 110 So.
Tenneco Oil Co. v. Hines 535 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Quiett v. Estate of Moore 378 So. 2d 362 La. 1980
In an unpublished opinion, , 110 So.
Freeman Baptist Church v. Herman Dempsey Hillen 345 So. 2d 74 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Kinney v. Waddell 171 So. 2d 782 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
Roy v. Elmer 153 So. 2d 209 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
In such cases a title apparently good, is all that is required to maintain the petitory action.” *212 98 , 110 So.
Succession of Danneel 152 So. 2d 29 La. 1963
Texas Company v. Stewart 101 So. 2d 222 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1958
Shannon v. Berlin 92 So. 2d 284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
Curry v. Caillier 37 So. 2d 863 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
Overruled Janney v. Calmes 33 So. 2d 510 La. 1947
Succession of Lissa 193 So. 663 La. 1940
Succession of Dancie 186 So. 14 La. 1939
Hutton v. Adkins 186 So. 908 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
gh in a petitory action the plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title, yet when the defendant has no title at all, he cannot, as a trespasser, take advantage of any defect in the muni-ments of title shown by the plaintiff; in such a case, a title apparently good, is sufficient to maintain a petitory action.” , 110 So.
In Re Liquidation of Reliance Homestead Ass'n 181 So. 22 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1938
In Re St. Vincent De Paul Benev. Ass'n of New Orleans 175 So. 140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
Chabaud Praying for Possession, 3 Orleans App. 420; , 110 So.
Hammond Lumber Co. v. Higgins 172 So. 782 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
Succession of Fachan 154 So. 15 La. 1934
Succession of Bibbins 152 So. 592 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1934
97 , , the court, by inference at least, said that a creditor might raise a question of jurisdiction in succession proceedings.
Succession of Lewis 142 So. 121 La. 1932
Howell v. Kretz 131 So. 204 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
Dixon v. Commercial National Bank 127 So. 428 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
from showing that other persons are in fact heirs, yet, until such other person is named, and evidence offered to show his heirship in preference to those who may have been admitted by the court of probates, which has not been done in this case, such evidence of heirship must be held sufficient.” The above from the Doty case was quoted by the court in the late case of Taylor vs. Williams et al., , 110 So.
Succession of Franklin 114 So. 583 La. 1927