Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Weingart v. Delgado, 16 So. 2d 254.
-
Thomas v. Bridges
144 So. 3d 1001
La. 2014
59, 87 , (1950); , (1943); Gaines v. Crichton, 187 La.
-
Council of City of New Orleans v. Washington
9 So. 3d 854
La. 2009
1072 , , *857 105-06 (1959); , (1943); Gaines v. Crichton, 187 La.
-
Geiger v. State Ex Rel Dept. of Health
815 So. 2d 80
La. 2002
1072 , -06 (1959); , (1943); Gaines v. Crichton, 187 La.
-
Boudreaux v. STATE, DOTD
815 So. 2d 7
La. 2002
1072 , -06 (1959); , (1943); Gaines v. Crichton, 187 La.
-
Cummings v. Wafer
499 So. 2d 184
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
752 , (1943); Richardson v. Stan Weber & Associates, Inc., (La.App.
-
Richardson v. Stan Weber & Associates, Inc.
400 So. 2d 1196
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
(1943); Marpco, Inc. v. South States Pipe & Supply et al., (La.App.
-
Lotz v. Hessler
369 So. 2d 265
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
(1943); Probst v. Di Giovanni, 232 La.
-
Garlete v. Rodriguez
126 So. 2d 182
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1961
456 ; , ; Probst v. DiGiovanni, 232 La.
- Krauss Company v. Develle 110 So. 2d 104 La. 1959
-
Lambert v. Bond
102 So. 2d 467
La. 1958
See, among others, , ; Crichton v. Lee, 209 La.
-
Williams v. Cormier
100 So. 2d 307
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
2021, 2025, 2035; , ; Morrison v. Mioton, 163 La.
-
Probst v. Di Giovanni
95 So. 2d 321
La. 1957
r to purchase was conditioned upon his ability to secure a loan of $12,500 at a rate of interest not to exceed 5% per annum and for a period of not less than 15 years, and that this was clearly a stipulation in his favor, placed in the contract to insure his ability to finance the purchase, and that such stipulation could be waived by offering cash instead of securing a loan, , —however, the limitation of time to a period of fifteen days from acceptance of the offer was obviously inserted for th
- Succession of Kamlade 94 So. 2d 257 La. 1957
- Davis v. Lewis & Lewis 78 So. 2d 173 La. 1954
- Davis v. Lewis & Lewis 78 So. 2d 173 La. 1954
-
Succession of Fertel v. Fertel
76 So. 2d 377
La. 1954
■ And, while a contention neither pleaded nor passed on by the district court will not be considered on appeal, , ; Crichton v. Lee, 209 La.
-
Slack v. Munson
61 So. 2d 618
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
2d 692 , , , Harvey v. Riedeinger, La.App., , Savich v. Ruiz, La.
- Martin-Parry Corp. v. New Orleans Fire Detection Service 60 So. 2d 83 La. 1952
-
Kenney v. Wedderin
56 So. 2d 550
La. 1951
to purchase was conditioned upon his ability to secure a loan of $12,-500 at a rate of interest not to exceed 5% per annum and for a period of not less than 15 years, and that this was clearly a stipulation in his favor, placed in the contract to insure his ability to finance the purchase, and that such stipulation could be waived by offering cash instead of securing a loan, , — however, the limitation of time to a period of fifteen days from acceptance of the offer was obviously inserted for th
- State Ex Rel. Fitzmaurice v. Clay 23 So. 2d 177 La. 1945
-
Schroeder v. Morris
20 So. 2d 437
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
enforceable as containing a potestative condition, , and consequently hold that the clause concerning a homestead loan is not potestative but is merely a suspensive condition and that if it is shown that that supensive condition could have been complied with, , , and as it said in Morrison v. Mioton et al., 163 La.
-
Harvey v. Riedlinger
17 So. 2d 60
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1944
See Weingart v. Delgado, La.Sup., ; Stephen L. Guice Co., Inc. v. Benjamin Perkowski, La.App., ; also Morrison v. Mioton, 163 La.