Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Westwego Canal & Terminal Co. v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 9 So. 2d 389.

43 citing documents.

State, Department of Transportation & Development v. Stone 692 So. 2d 1241 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
13:3666 (expert witness fees) and Westwego Canal & , -3 (La.1942) (expenses incurred for surveys, maps and plats necessary to enable the party to make out his case are taxable as costs).
Alexander v. STATE DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS 342 So. 2d 1201 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
Westwego Canal & , (1942); Sterkx v. Gravity Drainage District No. 1 of Rapides Parish, (La.
State, Department of Highways v. Willet 322 So. 2d 383 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Westwego Canal & , (1942).
Parish of Jefferson v. Harimaw, Inc. 297 So. 2d 694 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Westwego Canal & , (1942); State of Louisiana v. Salemi, supra.
State, Dept. of Highways v. Trippeer Realty Corp. 276 So. 2d 315 La. 1973
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Rivers 242 So. 2d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
341 , ; Westwego Canal & , (appropriation).
Reymond v. State Ex Rel. Department of Highways 231 So. 2d 375 La. 1970
The statement in Westwego Canal & T. Co. v. L ouisiana Highway Com’n, , , was dictum based upon two Court of Appeal cases.
Compass v. Department of Highways 224 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
784 , (1965), 2 which was interpreted as having the effect of overruling the earlier opinion of the Supreme Court in Westwego Canal and Terminal Co., , (1942).
City of Natchitoches v. State 221 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
Bazanac v. State ex rel. Department of Highways 218 So. 2d 121 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
48:22 does not authorize suits against the Department of Highways for the recovery of damages ex delicto, citing as authority the case of Westwego Canal & , , wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court held as follows: “ ‘It has been held, and now appears to be well settled, that the provision in Act 95 of 1921, Ex.Sess., whereby the Highway Commission is declared to be a body corporate and that as such it may sue or be sued, does not authorize suits against the Co
Sterkx v. Gravity Drainage Dist. No. 1 of Rapides Par. 214 So. 2d 552 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1968
341 , ; Westwego Canal & , (appropriation).
Herrin v. Perry 215 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
103 (1939) the court said: “The immunity exists unless it is especially waived by the state, and the general grant of such powers as corporations usually exercise should not be construed as a waiver of this immunity.” , (1942) the court expressly held, on the identical issue in the present case: “ ‘It has been held, and now appears to be well settled, that the provision in Act 95 of 1921, Ex.Sess., whereby the High *181 way Commission is declared to be a body corporate and that as such it may su
State Ex Rel. Department of Highways v. Salemi 193 So. 2d 252 La. 1966
805 ; Westwego Canal & , ; State of Louisiana Through the Department of Highways v. Jones, 243 La.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Reimers 192 So. 2d 558 La. 1966
Act 135 of 1936, as amended in particulars which are unimportant here, became Title 13, Section 4521 of the Revised Statutes and was first asserted to relieve the Highway Commission (now Department of Highways) from the payment of costs in Westwego Canal & , (1942).
Lambert v. Austin Bridge Company 189 So. 2d 752 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
48:22 does not authorize suits against the Department of Highways for the recovery of damages ex delicto, citing as authority the case of Westwego Canal & Terminal Co., , , wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court held as follows: "It has been held, and now appears to be well settled, that the provision in Act 95 of 1921, Ex.
State, Department of Highways v. Babineaux 189 So. 2d 450 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
341 , ; Westwego Canal & , ; State through Department of Highways v. Salemi, La.App., 1 Cir., -541 (good summary).
State, Sabine River Authority v. Salter 184 So. 2d 783 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
Westwego Canal & , ; and Harrison v. Louisiana *789 Highway Commission, 202 La.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Reimers 182 So. 2d 718 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Highway Commission (1942) , .
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Salemi 185 So. 2d 536 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
In Westwego Canal & , , (which involved application of Act 135 of 1936, the counterpart of present LSA-R.S.
Dow v. Department of Highways 179 So. 2d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
process clause of our Constitution (Article 1, Section 2), supra, particularly with respect to expropriation and appropriation cases, the courts have held-that the exemption does not apply for it would prevent the property owner from receiving “just and adequate compensation.” , (1942) and in Bernard v. State of Louisiana, Dept. of Public Works, La.App., (3rd Cir. 1961) wherein the court declared: “Appellant further contends that the trial court erred in assessing the Department of Public Works
Klein v. Department of Highways 175 So. 2d 454 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1965
48:22 has been interpreted so as not to include tort liability, Westwego Canal & , (1942); Kilberg v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 1928, 8 La.App.
Pittman Const. Co. v. Housing Auth. of New Orleans 169 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1965
* * *" (Emphasis supplied) *140 Exceptions to this rule have since been made in condemnation proceedings (See Westwego Canal & , ; Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
Cox v. East Baton Rouge Parish School Board 165 So. 2d 667 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
See Westwego Canal & , ; Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
Orleans Parish School Board v. Dorsett 161 So. 2d 274 La. 1964
*796 990, ), unless tender of the true value of the property has heen made before proceeding to a forced expropriation.
Poirier v. T. L. James & Co. 163 So. 2d 171 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1964
1029 , ; Westwego Canal & , .
State Ex Rel. Department of Highways v. Jones 146 So. 2d 414 La. 1962
Westwego Canal & , ; Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Latil 137 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
Except as other wise provided by law, the court may render judgment for costs, or any part thereof, against any party, as it may consider equitable.” We find the language in the Westwego Canal & , , particularly applicable to the issue at bar, and quote therefrom as follows: age, although it may be conceded that the statutes as to costs involved in civil actions do not apply.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Hart 137 So. 2d 361 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
see, also, Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Jones 138 So. 2d 466 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
see, also, Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
State v. Rownd 119 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1960
452 , ; Westwego Canal & , .
Duree v. Maryland Casualty Company 114 So. 2d 594 La. 1959
* * *” Also, the distinction was recognized in Westwego Canal and Terminal Company, , .
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Guidry 109 So. 2d 231 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
see, also, Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
Housing Authority v. Polmer 91 So. 2d 600 La. 1956
unless tender of the true value of the property has been made before proceeding *459 to a forced expropriation.
East Baton Rouge Parish School Board v. Ford 76 So. 2d 20 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
The Supreme Court, in Westwego Canal & , , stated the rule in expropriation suits as follows: “To give to Act 135 of 1936 the effect presently contended for by the attorneys for the Highway Commission would make it unconstitutional, because it is provided in Section 2 of Article 1 of the Constitution of 1921 that private property cannot be
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. La Bauve 75 So. 2d 862 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
Westwego Canal & , ; Louisiana Highway Commission v. Davis, 204 La.
STATE, DEPT. OF HWYS. v. Barineau 72 So. 2d 869 La. 1954
see, also, Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Barineau 72 So. 2d 869 La. 1954
see, also, Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
Long v. Northeast Soil Conservation Dist. of La. 72 So. 2d 543 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
Texas Company v. State Mineral Board, supra; Westwego Canal & Terminal Co., Inc., v. Louisiana Highway Commission, , 9 So.
Marino v. City of Baton Rouge 61 So. 2d 588 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
13:4521, 13:4581, 26:302; and the case of Westwego Canal & , .
Gulf Shipside Storage Corporation v. Thames 46 So. 2d 62 La. 1950
See Westwego Canal & , ; Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
Makofsky v. Department of Highways 18 So. 2d 605 La. 1944
Westwego Canal & , ; and Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 202 La.
Harrison v. Louisiana Highway Commission 11 So. 2d 612 La. 1942
The question of liability of the highway commission for such court *356 costs as are in contest here was put at rest in the decision rendered only three months ago in the case of Westwego Canal & , , where it was held that the property owner, being successful in a suit against the highway commission for the value of land taken for highway purposes, was entitled to recover the costs incurred necessarily by the plaintiff for the proving of his case.
Fletcher v. Department of Highways 9 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
In the recent case of Westwego Canal Terminal Co., Inc., v. Louisiana Highway Commission, , , the Supreme Court held that the provisions of this Statute did not apply in an expropriation suit because the costs of Court incurred by the successful plaintiff in such proceeding constituted an element of the damage suffered when his property was taken for public purposes and for which he had to rece