Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Lannes, 174 So. 94.

15 citing documents.

  • State v. Davis 176 So. 3d 580 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
  • Petty v. Petty 560 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
  • Succession of Bacot 502 So. 2d 1118 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
  • Succession of Green v. Mears 499 So. 2d 637 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    The facts of this case are very similar to those in , 174 So.
  • Gray v. Gray 451 So. 2d 579 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • Thomas v. Thomas 440 So. 2d 879 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
  • Miller v. LaFrance 359 So. 2d 328 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
  • Succession of Keuhling 187 So. 2d 520 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
  • Succession of Washington 140 So. 2d 906 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
  • Succession of Moore 94 So. 2d 666 La. 1957
    ve, or disguise, not merely one that is notorious; that `the concubinage should be so public as to be practically avowed, not necessarily by word, but at any rate by unambiguous, unequivocal conduct; that the relations must be such that, when sought to be made the basis of judicial action, no odious inquisition might be necessary, and no nice poising of testimony.'" , 174 So.
  • Succession Moore 94 So. 2d 666 La. 1957
    e, or disguise, not merely one that is notorious; that ‘the concubinage should be so public as to be practically avowed, not necessarily by word, but at any rate by unambiguous, unequivocal conduct; that the relations must be such that, when sought to be made the basis of judicial action, no odious inquisition might be necessary, and no nice poising of testimony.’ ” , 174 So.
  • Succession of Cervini 84 So. 2d 818 La. 1955
  • Manning v. Harrell 59 So. 2d 389 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1952
    The Supreme Court in the , 174 So.
  • Patin v. T. L. James Co. 39 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
    In support of the contention they make, counsel for plaintiff rely on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Succession of Lannes, reported in , 174 So.
  • Heatwole v. Stansbury 33 So. 2d 196 La. 1947
    The difference between open and secret concubinage is established in the , 174 So.