Causey v. Opelousas-St. Landry Securities Co.
Causey v. Opelousas-St. Landry Securities Co., 175 So. 448 (La. 1937).
Cited by
- Bates v. Department of Culture, Recreation & Tourism, Office of State Museum 694 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
- Enterkin v. Devaux 266 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
- Heyse v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 229 So. 2d 724 La. 1969
- Wooten v. Central Mutual Insurance Company 182 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
- Franks v. City of Alexandria 128 So. 2d 310 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
- Resweber v. Jacob 125 So. 2d 241 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
- Fontenot v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 113 So. 2d 33 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
- Coulon v. Anthony Hamlin, Inc. 98 So. 2d 193 La. 1957
- Hall v. Walker 67 So. 2d 177 La. 1953
- Rock v. Varuso 61 So. 2d 741 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
- Rayford v. &198tna Ins. Co. 193 So. 413 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
- Causey v. Opelousas-St. Landry Securities Co. 188 So. 739 La. 1939
Opinion text
On Rehearing. PER CURIAM. This suit was prosecuted in forma pauperis under the provisions of Act No. 156 of 1912, § 2, as amended by Act No. 165 of 1934, but through oversight in our decree we taxed the costs of appeal against the plaintiff-appellee, and we, therefore, correct the same so as to read as follows: “For the reasons assigned, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment appealed from is hereby annulled and set aside and both cases are hereby remanded to the lower court for further proceedings according to law, all costs to await the final determination of the cases.” Rehearing refused. O’NIELL, C. J., is of the opinion that defendant’s petition for a rehearing should be granted.