Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite P. Olivier & Sons, Inc. v. Board of Com'rs, 160 So. 419.

19 citing documents.

Old Spanish Trail Credit Union v. Felix Elbert Sexton, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
It is well settled that “[a] tort is a private wrong, independent of contract.” P. Olivier & Sons v. Board of Comm’rs, So.
Old Spanish Trail Credit Union v. Sexton 941 So. 2d 709 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
It is well settled that “[a] tort is a private wrong, independent of contract.” P. Olivier & Sons v. Board of Comm’rs, , 160 So.
Sliman v. McBee 311 So. 2d 248 La. 1975
[9] E.g., P. Olivier & , 160 So.
White v. White 233 So. 2d 289 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Citing P. Olivier & , 160 So.
Johnson v. Johnson 171 So. 2d 710 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
P. Olivier & Sons v. Board of Com’rs of Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal Dist., , 160 So.
Davis v. Le Blanc 149 So. 2d 252 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
See also: Reserve Insurance Co. v. Fabre, La., ; P. Olivier & , 160 So.
Barrett Division, Allied Chemical & Dye Corp. v. Duplantis 141 So. 2d 478 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
The Court feels that the facts of this case follow the rule as set forth by the Louisiana Supreme Court in P. Oliver & , 160 So.
Vicknair v. Rapides Parish School Board 128 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
burden of the recon-ventional demand is that the defendant in reconvention has failed to carry out its contract, and however stoutly it may have been alleged that this failure was due to negligence, we think that, nevertheless, the claim is in reality *825 based on a breach of contract and is, therefore, not prescribed in one year.’ “In the case of P. Oliver & , 160 So.
Williams v. Marionneaux 124 So. 2d 919 La. 1960
855 , 859 and P. Olivier & Sons v. Board of Com’rs, , 160 So.
Mix v. City of New Orleans 126 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1960
859 ; and Olivier & Sons v. Board of Com'rs, 1935, , 160 So.
Loew's, Incorporated v. Don George, Inc. 110 So. 2d 553 La. 1959
* * * ” Cf. Parro v. Fifteen Oil Co., La.App., ; Oliver & Sons v. Board of Com’rs of Lake Charles, , 160 So.
Quarles v. Lewis 98 So. 2d 301 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
Our learned brother below felt this result called for by the Supreme Court’s approving interpretation in their previous opinion in this case of P. Olivier & Sons v. Board of Com’rs, , 160 So.
Marsalis v. La Salle 94 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
The Supreme Court in P. Olivier & Sons, Inc., v. Board of Com'rs of Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal Dist., , 160 So.
Quarles v. Lewis 75 So. 2d 14 La. 1954
859 and P. Olivier & Sons v. Board of Com’rs, , 160 So.
Quarles v. Lewis 67 So. 2d 106 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
In P. Olivier & Sons, Inc. v. Board of Com’rs of Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal Dist., , 160 So.
Transportation Equipment Co. v. Younger Bros. 34 So. 2d 347 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
Levin's Auction Exchange v. Samuels 28 So. 2d 340 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
Hope v. Madison 193 So. 666 La. 1940
855 ; P. Olivier & , 160 So.
Bandel v. Sabine Lumber Co. 193 So. 359 La. 1939