DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ritsch Alluvial Land Co. v. Adema, 30 So. 2d 753.

18 citing documents.

  • Klein v. RECORDER OF MTG. FOR ORLEANS PARISH 430 So. 2d 1047 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
    an exception of no right of action was maintained to defeat a suit by a prior owner who sought to annul a tax sale.
  • Succession of Skye 417 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
    101 , (1956) (per curiam on application for rehearing); , (1947); Outdoor Electric Advertising v. Saurage, 207 La.
  • Lambert v. Donald G. Lambert Const. Co. 370 So. 2d 1254 La. 1979
    101 , (1956) (per curiam on application for rehearing); , (1947); Outdoor Electric Advertising v. Saurage, 207 La.
  • Weil v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 323 So. 2d 524 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
    (1947); Younger v. American Radiator and Standard San.
  • Invest, Incorporated v. State 247 So. 2d 175 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
    Younger v. American Radiator and Standard Sanitary Corp., La.App.
  • Langley v. Copolymer Rubber & Chemical Corp. 233 So. 2d 353 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
  • Bielkiewicz v. Rudisill 201 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
    Younger v. American Radiator and Standard Sanitary Corp., La.App.
  • Harper v. Celotex Corp. 183 So. 2d 350 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
    825 , , are controlling on this point.
  • Scott v. Ware 160 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1964
    Art. 681; , ; State ex rel.
  • Cattle Farms, Inc. v. Abercrombie 155 So. 2d 426 La. 1963
    Defendants’ exception specifically relates to the person of the plaintiffs; it shows that these plaintiffs are without interest in the subject matter of the suit and are, therefore, without right to prosecute same.” *428 ' Initially, we notice that the Court of Appeal, in resolving the instant dispute, , .
  • Cattle Farms, Inc. v. Abercrombie 146 So. 2d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    Our interpretation of the exception convinces us that it presents the same question *691 , , and in which the Supreme Court said that that particular type of exception of no right of action might be tried in advance of the trial of a case on the merits, saying that “if the plaintiff corporation is not the owner of the land, it has no standing in court to attack the title of defendants.” The o
  • Jefferson v. Jefferson 145 So. 2d 356 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    Art. 15, La.Code Prac.; , .
  • Guenard v. Key 131 So. 2d 108 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
  • Johnston v. City of New Orleans 101 So. 2d 206 La. 1958
  • Short & Murrell v. Department of Highways 98 So. 2d 170 La. 1957
    Art. 15, La.Code Prac.; , .
  • Wischer v. Madison Realty Company 92 So. 2d 589 La. 1956
    Termini v. McCormick, supra; , .
  • Mitchell v. First National Life Insurance 91 So. 2d 788 La. 1956
  • Holley v. Butler Furniture Co. 37 So. 2d 476 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
    As against these authorities on which counsel for plaintiff rely, , , which is the decision cited by the defendants as disposing of the question at issue.