DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hortman-Salmen Co. v. White, 123 So. 709.

15 citing documents.

  • Testa Distributing Co., Inc. v. Tarver 584 So. 2d 300 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
  • Dupre v. Joe's Riverside Seafood, Inc. 578 So. 2d 158 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    Hortman-Salmen *164 , 123 So.
  • Nugent v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 551 So. 2d 797 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    Cambridge Corner Corp. v. Menard, supra; , 123 So.
  • Cambridge Corner Corp. v. Menard 525 So. 2d 527 La. 1988
  • Sanders v. Old Quarter Tours, Inc. 499 So. 2d 1346 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
  • Aramburo v. Travelers Ins. Co. 426 So. 2d 260 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
    The ordinary rule of burden of proof is that one who claims the benefit of an exception to the general law must show that he or she comes within the exception; , 123 So.
  • Chivleatto v. Divinity 379 So. 2d 784 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
    The conventional rule is that one claiming the benefit of an exception to the general law must show that he comes within the exception; Hortman-Salmen Co. v. White, 1929, , 123 So.
  • Century National Bank v. Parent 341 So. 2d 1371 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    her excavation has been started so that it can be observed on inspection, or material has been furnished and delivered to the job site which is visible upon inspection and which material when delivered had a value in excess of one hundred dollars provided, however, that test piling shall be excluded from this definition.” (emphasis ours) , 123 So.
  • Courshon v. MAURONER-CRADDOCK INC. 219 So. 2d 258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    That Section 4812 applies when the contract and bond are not recorded has been squarely held in Hortman-Salmen Co., , 123 So.
  • Capital Bank & T. Co. v. Broussard Paint & Wall. Co. 198 So. 2d 204 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
  • Bank of Morehouse v. Williamson Builders, Inc. 169 So. 2d 619 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    the lands and improvements except, inter alia, a mortgage which “exists and has been duly recorded before the work or labor is begun or any material is furnished * The provision in the other section of the statute is to the effect that the mortgage is superior when it “has been recorded and the note delivered to the lender before any work or labor has begun.” In Hortman-Salmen Co., , 123 So.
  • Brown Brokerage Co. v. Greely Plumbing Co. 135 So. 2d 551 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    1067 ], *554 , it is specifically judicially decreed that a furnisher of labor and materials is granted a lien which is superior to that of a mortgage unless the mortgage was recorded prior to the furnishing of any material or the performance of any labor on the job, and the burden of proof rests upon the mortgage holder of showin
  • Highland Lumber Supply Co. v. Young 38 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
    Defendant also cites and relies upon Hortman-Salmen Company, , 123 So.
  • H. R. Hayes Lumber Co. v. H. M. Jones Drilling Co. 148 So. 899 La. 1933
    Section 12 of Act No. 298 of 1926; , 123 So.
  • Hortman-Salmen Company v. White 123 So. 715 La. 1929
    As to whether plaintiff’s- mortgage was recorded before or after the commencement of the work is of no importance here, as it was in case No. 29530, bearing the same title as this case, and this day decided, , 1 since *1074 the furnishers of material here have no privileges to assert against plaintiff’s previously recorded mortgage.