Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Spiller v. Spiller, 129 So. 212.

24 citing documents.

Michael and Christine Dauzat v. State of La., Dotd La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Cardinale v. Cardinale 397 So. 2d 54 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
State v. Progue 350 So. 2d 1181 La. 1977
Gauthreaux v. Gauthreaux 315 So. 2d 402 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Smith v. United Fire Insurance 303 So. 2d 283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
State v. Johnson 193 So. 2d 794 La. 1967
812 , , State v. Gonzales, 173 La.
Overruled Texas Pipe Line Company v. Stein 190 So. 2d 244 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
Levy v. Indest 113 So. 2d 3 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1959
State v. Butler 89 So. 2d 294 La. 1956
812 , ; State v. Tatum, 162 La.
Tanner v. Tanner 86 So. 2d 80 La. 1956
State v. Turner 81 So. 2d 861 La. 1955
812 , ; State v. Tatum, 162 La.
State v. Morris 62 So. 2d 649 La. 1952
812 , ; State v. Tatum, 162 La.
Bonvillion v. Papa 48 So. 2d 897 La. 1950
Parker, Seale & Kelton v. Messina 36 So. 2d 724 La. 1948
State v. Reed 19 So. 2d 28 La. 1944
812 , ; State v. McGuire, 146 La.
Collins v. Collins 193 So. 702 La. 1940
Wilson v. Henderson 191 So. 602 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Johnson v. Hillyer, Deutsch, Edwards, Inc. 186 So. 365 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Landry v. Regira 178 So. 502 La. 1937
The plaintiff contends that the reconyen-t'ional demand for divorce on the ground *953 of adultery should have been stricken out, for the reason that it is not incidental to or connected with the main demand, , 129 So.
Alpha v. Aucoin 167 So. 835 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
Tullis v. Calhoun 165 So. 714 La. 1936
Tullis v. Calhoun 161 So. 619 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
Newson v. Newson 146 So. 473 La. 1933
Starns v. Starns 146 So. 165 La. 1933
So far as the attorneys’ fee is concerned, although plaintiff has been unsuccessful in her suit, and therefore is not entitled to recover the fee in her own name, since she cannot sue the husband during the community to recover a debt, her attorneys may recover a fee against her husband on a quantum meruit, , 129 So.