No. 3218
Precedential
Processed
Bodenheimer v. Mary Planting & Manufacturing Co.
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., February 17, 1950 44 So. 2d 343; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., May 22, 1928 8 La. App. 334; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., February 8, 1904 1 Teiss. 136; La. Ct. App. 3d Cir., May 20, 1971 246 So. 2d 880; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., January 6, 1969 218 So. 2d 83
Bodenheimer v. Mary Planting & Manufacturing Co., 1 Teiss. 13 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1903).
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Ferre Canal Co. v. Burgin 106 La. 309
Opinion text
Dufour, J., dissents on the authority of 106 La. 309 , Canal Company vs Burgin, the contract declared on being in writing and not sighed by both parties.