DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite In Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., 169 So. 464.

18 citing documents.

  • Backhus v. Transit Cas. Co. 549 So. 2d 283 La. 1989
  • Hayden v. Torrence 355 So. 2d 1362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
    850 , (1972); In re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Anderson v. West 354 So. 2d 636 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
    850 , (1972), In Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Washington v. St. Charles Parish School Board 288 So. 2d 321 La. 1974
    As we held in In Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Bonnette v. Karst 261 So. 2d 589 La. 1972
    See, also, In re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Matlack, Inc. v. Louisiana Public Service Commission 256 So. 2d 118 La. 1971
    163 , we observed: “In the construction of statutes, absurd results should be avoided, and when the literal construction would produce such a result, the letter of the law must give way to its spirit and the statute should be construed so as to produce a reasonable result.” See, also, In re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Gautreau v. Board of Electrical Examiners 167 So. 2d 425 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    683 , : "Appropriate here is the following found in Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Wilson v. King 165 So. 2d 70 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1964
    482 ; In re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • State Ex Rel. Thompson v. Department of City Civil Service 38 So. 2d 385 La. 1948
    Appropriate here is the following found in Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Smith v. Town of Vinton 25 So. 2d 237 La. 1946
    risprudence is disclosed by the following expressions: “ * * * But even if the language of the act is as broad as opponents contend, it is then the duty of the court to restrain its operation within narrower limits than its words import, if the Court is satisfied that their literal meaning would extend to cases which the legislature never intended to include.” In re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., , 169 So.
  • Brock v. Citizens State Bank & Trust Co. 182 So. 679 La. 1938
    448, , this court held, that the privilege referred to in the statute arises only where the bank against whose assets the privilege is sought to be exercised receives the instrument of indebtedness solely for the purpose of collection.
  • Brock v. Citizens State Bank & Trust Co. 180 So. 650 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
    Co., Intervener, , 169 So.
  • Overruled In Re Interstate Trust & Banking Co. 176 So. 1 La. 1937
    Subsequently the Jones County decision was overruled by the decision of this court in the case of In re Hibernia Bank & Trust Company (Pan American Life Insurance Company, Intervener), , 169 So.
  • Overruled Brock v. Citizens State Bank & Trust Co. 172 So. 546 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
    This opinion in part is overruled in Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Company, , 169 So.
  • In Re Canal Bank & Trust Co. 172 So. 48 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1937
  • Miami Corporation v. State 173 So. 315 La. 1936
    Another recent decision that is cited in the prevailing opinion in the present case is the case entitled In re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. (Pan American Life Insurance Co., Intervener), , 169 So.
  • In Re Canal Bank & Trust Co. 170 So. 427 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
  • In Re Canal Bank & Trust Co. 170 So. 420 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
    The purpose of the framers of the statute appears to us to be obvious and is recognized in the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. (Pan American Life Insurance Co., Intervener), , in which that court quoted with approval an elaborate opinion of Judge H. C. Cage of the civil district court in which he discussed the reasons which led to the enactment of that legislation.