DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hunter Co. v. Ulrich, 8 So. 2d 531.

20 citing documents.

  • Indigo Minerals, LLC v. Pardee Minerals, LLC 37 So. 3d 1122 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    621 , (1943); , (1942); Ohio Oil Co. v. Cox, 196 La.
  • Carbo v. City of Slidell 844 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    640, 699 and 706; , (1942); King v. Strohe, 95-656, pp. 1-5 (La.App.
  • Ultramar Oil & Gas Ltd. v. Fournet 598 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
    15 (La.1932); Continental Oil Co. v. Landry, supra; Whitehall v. Heard, supra; Shell Oil v. Pitman, supra.
  • Horton v. Mobley 578 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
  • Porter v. Acadia-Vermilion Irr. Co., Inc. 479 So. 2d 1003 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
    In Hunter Co., , (1942), our Supreme Court again addressed the issue of whether the stated consideration in a deed evidenced an intent to convey fee simple title or a servitude.
  • Cox v. Sanders 421 So. 2d 869 La. 1982
  • Spier v. Barnhill 168 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
    988 , (road servitude only); , (canal right of way servitude only); Calhoun v. Ardis, 174 La.
  • Mitchel v. Board of Commissioners 161 So. 2d 384 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1964
    468 ; Hunter Co., Inc., v. Ulrich, , 8 So.
  • Kellogg Bros., Inc. v. SINGER MANUFACTURING COMPANY 131 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
    517 ; Hunter Company, Inc. v. Ulrich, 1942, , ; International Paper Company v. Louisiana Central Lumber Company, 1943, 202 La.
  • Collins v. Hunter Co. 128 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    The decision of the Supreme Court in Hunter [Co.] v. Ulrich, , , answers that proposition adversely to counsel’s contention.” In view of this holding that the execution of separate mineral leases covering a portion of a servitude does not divide the servitude, it seems to us rather illogical to contend that the unilateral release of such a lease would divide the ser
  • Sun Oil Co. v. Kinder Canal Co. 93 So. 2d 551 La. 1957
    An almost identical situation was presented in Hunter Company, Inc., v. Ulrich, , , the decision in which is clearly decisive of this controversy.
  • Cormier v. Ferguson 92 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    as both parties hereto agree, if the interest conveyed by the 1926 instrument was indeed a mineral right, as claimed by defendant, then the unsuccessful but bona fide drilling for oil in 1935 and 1936 by defendant's (and plaintiffs') mineral lessee constituted user or exercise of the servitude so as to interrupt the running of the ten years' prescriptive period for non-user, , ; whereas if, on the other hand, plaintiffs' contention is correct that the 1926 deed conveyed only a royalty interest,
  • Boddie v. Drewett 87 So. 2d 516 La. 1956
  • Jantz v. Long Bell Petroleum Co. 86 So. 2d 918 La. 1956
    The decision of the Supreme Court in Hunter [Co.] v. Ulrich, , , answers that proposition adversely to counsel’s contention.
  • Smith v. Anisman 85 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    902 ; Hunter Company, Inc., v. Ulrich, 1942, , ; Standard Oil Company of Louisiana v. Futral, 1943, 204 La.
  • Mays v. Hansbro 64 So. 2d 232 La. 1953
    902 ; , ; Standard Oil Co. of La.
  • Mays v. Hansbro 64 So. 2d 232 La. 1953
    902 ; , ; Standard Oil Co. of La.
  • Sun Oil Co. v. Stout 46 So. 2d 151 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1950
    468 ; Hunter Co., Inc., v. Ulrich, , ; Parish of Jefferson v. Texas Co., 192 La.
  • McMurrey v. Gray 45 So. 2d 73 La. 1949
    1 ; Hunter Co., Inc., v. Ulrich, , .
  • Rock Island, A. & L. R. Co. v. Gournay 17 So. 2d 8 La. 1943
    468 ; Hunter Co., Inc., v. Ulrich, , ; Parish of Jefferson v. Texas Co. et al., 192 La.