Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Foster v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc., 13 So. 2d 850.
-
Succession of Jean Lipps Burke
La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2024
See, -253, (1943) (judgment granting a new trial is purely interlocutory and not final, and operates only as a postponement or a continuance).
- Alvarez v. LeBlanc 996 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
-
Explained
VaSalle v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
801 So. 2d 331
La. 2001
Co., Foster v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc., , (1943).
-
Anderson v. Wall
464 So. 2d 416
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
1841, 2083; , (1943); Pate v. Crescent Motors Exchange, Inc., (La.App.
-
Jackson v. Watson
360 So. 2d 582
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
[3] Code of Practice Article 566; Code of Civil Procedure Article 2083; , ; Bland v. Government Employees Ins.
-
Bland v. Government Employees Ins.
334 So. 2d 231
La. 1976
See Foster v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc., , (1943).
- Bunge Corporation v. Emmons 320 So. 2d 230 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
-
Miller v. Chicago Insurance Company
320 So. 2d 134
La. 1975
429 (1936); Foster v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc., , (1943); (La.App.
-
Simmons v. Beauregard Parish School Board
284 So. 2d 668
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
Art. 2083; , ; and Pate v. Crescent Motors Exchange, Inc., La.App., .
-
Isbell v. Pankratz
284 So. 2d 841
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1973
(1943), concerning the delays to apply for a new trial: "A judgment is not rendered until it is signed by the district judge."
-
Pate v. Crescent Motors Exchange, Inc.
256 So. 2d 471
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1972
[3] , ; Elchinger v. Lacroix, 192 La.
-
Hooter v. Farrar
113 So. 2d 94
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
884 , ; Foster v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc., , ; Vidrine v. Soileau, La.App., ; Mills v. Knox, La.App., ; Clement v. Pointe Coupee Parish School Board, La.App., ; Johnson v. Hunter, La.App., .
-
Edmisten v. Marks
75 So. 2d 878
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
Viator v. Heintz, 201 La, 884, ; , ; La.Law Rev., Vol.
- Meyer v. Esteb 75 So. 2d 421 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
-
Snuggs v. Burrus
67 So. 2d 599
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
We feel that we should not close the discussion of the matter without calling attention to a decision of the Supreme Court rendered in Foster v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc., , , in which the Court held that a judgment is not “rendered” until it is signed.
-
Mills v. Knox
55 So. 2d 272
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
884 , ; Interstate Electric Co. v. Interstate Electric Co. of Shreveport, Inc., La.App., ; Allen et al. v. Sullivan et al., La.App., ; Foster v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc., et al., , .