Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Devoke v. Yazoo M. v. R. Co., 30 So. 2d 816.

49 citing documents.

Yokum v. 615 Bourbon Street, LLC 977 So. 2d 859 La. 2008
Parish of East Feliciana v. Guidry 923 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Coulon v. Witco Corp. 848 So. 2d 135 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
502 , (1968); Devoke v. Yazoo & M.V.R.R., , DiCarlo v. Laundry & Dry Cleaning Service, 178 La.
Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. Entergy Corp. 804 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Co., , (1947), in which the continued operation of a railroad terminal in a negligent manner caused the continuous emission of dense smoke, Rgases, soot and cinders, and Craig v. Montelepre Realty Co., 252 La.
Crump v. Sabine River Authority 737 So. 2d 720 La. 1999
Co., , (1947), this Court again found that plaintiffs' claim had not prescribed where the defendant's continued operation of its railroad terminal in a negligent manner caused the continuous emission of dense smoke, gases, soot, and cinders onto their property.
Crosby v. Keys 590 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Bunge Corp. v. Gatx Corp. 557 So. 2d 1376 La. 1990
Fidelity Bank and Trust Co. v. Hammons 540 So. 2d 461 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Butler v. Baber 529 So. 2d 374 La. 1988
Co., , (1947); McGee v. Yazoo & M.V.R.
9 to 5 Fashions, Inc. v. Spurney 520 So. 2d 1276 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Co., , (1947), "every business, however lawful, must be conducted with due regard for the rights of others..."
Broussard v. Northcott Exploration Co., Inc. 481 So. 2d 125 La. 1986
South Central Bell Telephone Co. v. Texaco, Inc. 418 So. 2d 531 La. 1982
327 (1934); Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947); Craig v. Montelepre Realty Co., 252 La.
Androwski v. Ole McDonald's Farms, Inc. 407 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
South Central Bell Telephone Co. v. Texaco, Inc. 407 So. 2d 430 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Acadian Heritage Realty, Inc. v. City of Lafayette 394 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
866 , (1955); Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947)."
Wilson v. Hartzman 373 So. 2d 204 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
502 , (1968); Devoke v. Yazoo & DiCarlo v. Laundry & Dry Cleaning Service, 178 La.
Charia v. Stanley 359 So. 2d 291 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
866 , (1955); Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947).
Joubert v. STATE THROUGH STATE PARK, ETC. 345 So. 2d 220 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
866 , (1955); Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947).
Landry v. Pierre Part Natural Gas Co. 344 So. 2d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Nuckolls v. Louisiana State Highway Department 337 So. 2d 313 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1976
See e. g., Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947), (La.App.
Moreland v. Acadian Mobile Homes Park, Inc. 313 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1975
Co., , (1947), then the burden rests on them to apportion the damage which has occurred after the period fixed for prescription.
Patin v. Stockstill 315 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Hero Lands Company v. Texaco, Inc. 310 So. 2d 93 La. 1975
Templin v. Traders & General Insurance Company 288 So. 2d 660 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947); , (La.App.
Rayborn v. Smiley 253 So. 2d 664 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
See the Devoke [Devoke et al. v. Yazoo & , ] and McGee cases.” A rendering plant is not, however, a nuisance per se, and therefore subject to abatement upon proof of its existence.
Robichaux v. Huppenbauer 245 So. 2d 385 La. 1971
121 , (1944) (smoke, gases, soot, cinders); Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947) (obnoxious smoke including gases, soot, and cinders).
Craig v. Montelepre Realty Co. 211 So. 2d 627 La. 1968
* * *” Devoke v. Yazoo & , .
Florsheim v. Department of Highways 201 So. 2d 155 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1967
With reference to the first of these, the rule recognized in Devoke v. Yazoo & , (1947), is clearly applicable.
Burke v. Besthoff Realty Co. 196 So. 2d 293 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1967
Freestate Industrial Development Co. v. T. & H., INC. 188 So. 2d 746 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1966
Co., , (1947), wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court held that the prescriptive period of Articles 3536 and 3537 of the Louisiana Revised Civil Code did not apply to causes of action brought under Articles 666, 667, 668 and 669 of the Louisiana Revised Civil Code.
Gulf Insurance Co. v. Employers Liability Assur. Corp. 170 So. 2d 125 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1964
Plaintiff cites the cases of Devoke v. Yazoo & , 30 So.
Edwards v. United Gas Pipeline Co. 164 So. 2d 108 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
866 , ; Devoke v. Yazoo & , ; and Gotreaux v. Gary, 232 La.
Adams v. Grigsby 152 So. 2d 619 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1963
274 ; Devoke v. Yazoo & , ; Fontenot v. Magnolia Petroleum Company, et al., 227 La.
Deaton v. Causey 154 So. 2d 267 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
In Devoke, et al. v. Yazoo & , , the Supreme Court held that in cases where the operating cause of injury was continuous, giving rise to damages from day to day, prescription has no application.
Bankston v. Farmers Cooperative Gin of Winnsboro 116 So. 2d 91 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
Devoke v. Yazoo & , , and the authorities cited therein.
Jeansonne v. Cox 96 So. 2d 557 La. 1957
411 ; De Voke v. Yazoo & , .
Ratier v. Gates 95 So. 2d 667 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
Devoke v. Yazoo & , and cases cited therein.
Gotreaux v. Gary 94 So. 2d 293 La. 1957
Devoke v. Yazoo & , .
Traylor v. Colvin 84 So. 2d 286 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
Devoke v. Yazoo & , ; Borgnemouth Realty Co. v. Gulf Soap Corporation, 212 La.
Fontenot v. Magnolia Petroleum Co. 80 So. 2d 845 La. 1955
In the case of Devoke v. Yazoo & , , we *878 reviewed the jurisprudence under our law and that of the common law states pertinent to various obligations which are imposed upon proprietors towards one another in the use and enjoyment of their property rights.
Codding v. Braswell Supply, Inc. 54 So. 2d 852 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
It is accurately described by Justice Fournet in Devoke v. Yazoo & , , when he said: “Clearly, therefore, the plaintiffs’ action is not one in tort, but, rather, one that springs from an obligation imposed upon property owners by the operation of law so that all may enjoy the maximum of liberty in the use and enjoyment of their respective properties.” In that suit t
Ellis v. Blanchard 45 So. 2d 100 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1950
121 , ; Devoke et al. v. Yazoo & , ; Borgemouth Realty Company, Ltd. v. Gulf Soap Corporation, 212 La.
O'Neal v. Southern Carbon Co. 43 So. 2d 230 La. 1949
1075 , ; and Devoke v. Yazoo & , .
O'Neal v. Southern Carbon Co. 43 So. 2d 230 La. 1949
Tunnage v. Eddy 42 So. 2d 382 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1949
On a , , 820, it may appear that it is a holding that the owner of property, regardless of lack of fault, may be held liable to an adjacent property owner for damages sustained as a result of what may occur on the property of the former.
Kelly v. Ozone Tung Cooperative 36 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
Galouye v. A. R. Blossman 32 So. 2d 90 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
Borgnemouth Realty Co. v. Gulf Soap Corporation 31 So. 2d 488 La. 1947
As was pointed out in the recent decision of this court in the case of Devoke et al. v. Yazoo & , , “It is the universally accepted rule of law that ‘The owner of property has a right to conduct thereon any lawful business not per se a nuisance, as long as the business is so conducted that it will not unreasonably inconvenience a neighbor in the reasonable enjoyment of his property.
O'Neal Et Ux. v. Southern Carbon Co. 31 So. 2d 216 La. 1947
We have this day handed, down an opinion in the case of Devoke et al. v. Yazoo and Mississippi Valley Railroad Company, La.Sup., , wherein we discussed at' length the law governing nuisances arising from the operation of a lawful business which caused substantial injury to adjoining property owners, and arrived at the conclusion that liability in such cases does not depend on the question of negligence.