DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Ratcliff, 24 So. 2d 456.

16 citing documents.

  • Roan v. Roan 870 So. 2d 626 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
  • Munson v. Munson 772 So. 2d 141 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
  • Panzico v. Panzico 716 So. 2d 505 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
    Sonny cites , (1945) for the accounting for such interest expense in the determination of the rent or profit falling into the community from his separate business properties.
  • Bridges v. Osborne 525 So. 2d 337 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
  • Parker v. Parker 517 So. 2d 264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • Cook v. Cook 457 So. 2d 235 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
    Succession of Ratcliff .
  • Willis v. Willis 454 So. 2d 429 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
    "The husband's separate property unquestionably did produce `profits' to the community, and, in the supreme court's words in [Succession of] Ratcliff, supra, [ ] 24 So.2d [456] at 460 [1945], `it is but just, equitable and proper that the ordinary expenditures required in the production of such profits and in the preservation of the property should be borne by the community.'
  • Cookmeyer v. Cookmeyer 354 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    129 ; Succession of Ratcliff, 1946, , .
  • Hurta v. Melcher 260 So. 2d 324 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    129 (1902); , (1945); that if the total charges against the revenue-producing separate property (including interest) exceed the revenue, the husband’s separate estate is to be charged with the excess.
  • Moore v. Moore 255 So. 2d 193 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
    The opinion does not state whether the payments on the mortgage were of principal or interest or both, but in , (1945), the Supreme Court described the debt due in Sharp v. Zeller as “interest due under a mortgage.” In Brunies, the Supreme Court held that the separate estate'was not indebted to the community for amounts paid out of community funds for principal and interest on mortgages, insurance premiums and ta
  • Harris v. Harris 160 So. 2d 359 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1964
    In , , the husband had entered into a contract for dissolution of the community of his second marriage, in which he agreed to pay the second wife $120,000 for her interest in their community estate.
  • Chrisentery v. Chrisentery 124 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    942 ; , ; Succession of Brunies, 209 La.
  • Thigpen v. Thigpen 91 So. 2d 12 La. 1956
    506 and , are cited in support of this proposition.
  • Succession of Siren 77 So. 2d 5 La. 1954
    To support their case counsel for the Administratrix rely upon the decisions in the suit of , , and in the case of Succession of Brunies, 209 La.
  • Succession of Ratcliff 33 So. 2d 114 La. 1947
    On the first occasion ( , ) the executors were appealing from a judgment sustaining the opposition of the widow in community, Mrs. Helen L. Rat-cliff, to their first annual account.
  • Succession of Brunies 25 So. 2d 287 La. 1946
    ip or community *635 ■consists of the profits of all the effects of which the husband has the administration and enjoyment, either of right or in fact, •of the produce of the reciprocal industry and labor of both husband and wife * * We do not think that this article is authority for, or supports, counsel’s contention, which has been fully answered by the case of , , and other decisions of this court analyzed and discussed therein.