Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Houghton v. Hall, 148 So. 37.

96 citing documents.

Lee v. Manning 505 So. 2d 902 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
Cooper v. Heirs of Cooper 421 So. 2d 314 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
Curtis, supra; Houghton v. Hall; , 148 So.
Crown Zellerbach Corp. v. Heck 407 So. 2d 770 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Curtis v. Curtis 403 So. 2d 56 La. 1981
Curtis v. Curtis 388 So. 2d 816 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
eparate any property either spouse "acquires during the marriage with separate funds ...," but the presumption of community character remains: one who claims separateness bears the burden of proof, and this burden is not met by the mere declaration by both spouses in a deed that one is acquiring the property as separate property with separate funds separately administered; Houghton v. Hall, 1933, , 148 So.
Luchsinger v. Boettner 388 So. 2d 93 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Cheramie v. St. Pierre 382 So. 2d 1003 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Perkins v. Ray 365 So. 2d 1189 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
Stolier v. Stolier 357 So. 2d 1334 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
[4] , 148 So.37; Swider v. Swider, La.App., ; LSA-C.C.
Jarred v. Jarred 355 So. 2d 566 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
Groves v. Board of Trustees of Teach. Retire. Sys. 324 So. 2d 587 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Succession of Broussard 306 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Daigre v. Cochrane 287 So. 2d 539 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
Succession of Pittman 282 So. 2d 799 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
420 , Houghton v. Hall, et al [ ], 148 So.
Succession of Milton 278 So. 2d 159 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Blalock v. Blalock 259 So. 2d 367 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1972
364 ; Houghton v. Hall, *371 , 148 So.
McElwee v. McElwee 255 So. 2d 883 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1972
Wurst v. Pruyn 233 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Paxton v. Bramlette 228 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
The wife's earnings from her own labor and industry, while living in community with her husband are community property, LSA-CCP Article 2334, , 148 So.
Gregory v. Gregory 223 So. 2d 238 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
Boulet v. Fruge 221 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
Hollier v. Broussard 220 So. 2d 175 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
NOTES [1] Civil Code Article 2334, , 148 So.
Morace v. Morace 220 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Harville v. Campbell 221 So. 2d 273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Succession of Barr 219 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1969
2402 and 2405, and the pronouncements in the jurisprudence *821 of this State, , 148 So.
Succession of Elrod v. Elrod 218 So. 2d 83 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
Succession of Barr 203 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
Commercial Credit Plan, Incorporated v. Perry 186 So. 2d 900 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Articles 2402, 2334, Civil Code; , 148 So.
Azar v. Azar 185 So. 2d 113 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
2334, 2402, and 2405; , 148 So.
Succession of Winsey 170 So. 2d 732 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Succession of Hollier 158 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
Vining v. Beatty 161 So. 2d 298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Bailey v. Alice C. Plantation & Refinery Inc. 152 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Lytell v. Lytell 144 So. 2d 925 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
Locantro v. Petrie 144 So. 2d 742 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
Monk v. Monk 144 So. 2d 384 La. 1962
Van Horn v. Vining 133 So. 2d 901 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
Succession of Blades 127 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1961
Southwest Natural Production Company v. Anderson 118 So. 2d 897 La. 1960
King v. Dearman 105 So. 2d 293 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
34 ; Houghton v. Hall, 1933, , 148 So.
Joseph v. Travis 99 So. 2d 548 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
Butler v. Burks 99 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1957
Taylor v. Dunn 97 So. 2d 415 La. 1957
d to the wife that the latter is purchasing with her separate and paraphernal funds, under her separate administration; that “the wife, * * * to overcome the presumption in: *633 favor of the community, must establish three crucial facts, namely: (1) The paraphernality of the funds; (2) the administration thereof separately and apart from her husband; and (3) investment by her.” , 148 So.
Weems v. Medak 93 So. 2d 217 La. 1957
Mitchell v. First National Life Insurance 91 So. 2d 788 La. 1956
Smith v. Smith 89 So. 2d 55 La. 1956
Prince v. Hopson 89 So. 2d 128 La. 1956
Abraham v. Abraham 87 So. 2d 735 La. 1956
It should be noted that the written affidavit executed by defendant on January 17, 1950, in accordance with Article 2386 of the Civil Code, reserved the fruits from her separate property but this cannot be held to- include the withdrawn earnings from Helshro, which fall into the community in accordance with *95 Artiele 2334 , 148 So.
State Ex Rel. Fields v. Rapides Parish School Board 79 So. 2d 312 La. 1955
But we do not regard the Riche decision, , 148 So.
Fazzio v. Krieger 76 So. 2d 713 La. 1954
Articles 2402, 2334, Civil Code; , 148 So.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by