Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Todd, 115 So. 653.

34 citing documents.

State ex rel. Gremillion v. Mississippi River Bridge Authority 131 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
Art. 646, LSA-C.C.P.; , 115 So.
Jones v. Mason 124 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
Tennessee Gas Transmission Co. v. Derouen 118 So. 2d 889 La. 1960
Thomas v. Southdown Sugars, Inc. 110 So. 2d 738 La. 1959
Taylor v. Dunn 97 So. 2d 415 La. 1957
Robinson v. Allen 88 So. 2d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
Sharp v. Sharp 78 So. 2d 491 La. 1955
Boyle v. Streiffer 65 So. 2d 393 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1953
Horn v. Skelly Oil Co. 60 So. 2d 65 La. 1952
Jamison v. Superior Oil Co. 57 So. 2d 896 La. 1952
Jamison v. Superior Oil Co. 57 So. 2d 896 La. 1952
Chiasson v. Duplechain 56 So. 2d 615 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
Sanders v. Flowers 49 So. 2d 858 La. 1950
Holicer Gas Co. v. Wilson 39 So. 2d 637 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
Douglas v. Haro 39 So. 2d 744 La. 1949
Whitney Nat. Bank v. Little Creek Oil Co. 33 So. 2d 693 La. 1947
112 , , wherein it was said that “No exception of non-joinder was filed; however, the court of its own motion may take cognizance of the lack of necessary parties.” , 115 So.
Tafolla v. Jones 23 So. 2d 569 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
Bologna Bros. v. Stephens 18 So. 2d 914 La. 1944
Ott v. Grace 13 So. 2d 138 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
Woods v. Jastremski 11 So. 2d 4 La. 1942
The decisions in , 115 So.
Anderson v. Edmondson 8 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
Randazzo v. Insurance Co. of State of Pennsylvania 200 So. 267 La. 1941
De Hart v. Continental Land & Fur Co. 200 So. 9 La. 1940
O'Sullivan v. Knop 198 So. 191 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
Since the exception of no cause of action has not been considered by the trial court, it should not properly be passed upon by us. Particularly should this rule be applied where a-necessary party is not before us. In , 115 So.
Reid v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans 192 So. 688 La. 1939
Parish of Jefferson v. Texas Co. 189 So. 580 La. 1939
In Re Liquidation of Reliance Homestead Ass'n 181 So. 22 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1938
Long v. Chailan 175 So. 42 La. 1937
Commercial Nat. Bank in Shreveport v. Haas 162 So. 57 La. 1935
Rosenthal Sloan Millinery Co. v. Picone 141 So. 494 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
Duplissey v. Thistlethwaite LumBer Co. 139 So. 489 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
Kinchen v. Ligamari 130 So. 228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
A similar situation existed and was noticed by the Supreme Court ex officio in , 115 So.
Succession of Cummings 128 So. 201 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
The result creates a situation, should the review of the proceedings leading to the sale whereby Mrs. Brugier purchased the other part of the property be undertaken, very similar to that which existed in the , 115 So.
Cavanaugh v. Youngblood 119 So. 776 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929