Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ober v. Williams, 35 So. 2d 219.

37 citing documents.

Cohort Ener. v. Caddo-Bossier Parishes Port 852 So. 2d 1174 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
); Chicago Mill & (La.App.
Willson v. UNOPENED SUCCESSION OF DAVIS 832 So. 2d 360 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Capdeville v. WHITE'S TEMPLE CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST, INC. 755 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
State v. BP Exploration & Oil Inc. 667 So. 2d 1219 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Ultramar Oil & Gas Ltd. v. Fournet 598 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
Whitehall, supra; , (1948)
Horton v. Mobley 578 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
(1948); Dobbins v. Hodges, supra; Chicago Mill & (La.App.
Dugas v. Modular Quarters, Inc. 561 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
Harris v. Baird 546 So. 2d 497 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
1026 , (S.Ct.1957); , (1948).
Succession of Jones v. Jones 486 So. 2d 1124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
See Ober v. Williams, 213 La.568, .
Brabham v. Harper 485 So. 2d 231 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Freeman v. Williams 450 So. 2d 1030 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Ward v. Pennington 434 So. 2d 1131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
` , (1948), the Louisiana Supreme Court had this to say: "The proposition advanced by plaintiff has been many times made and we find consistent rejection of it in a long line of authorities.
Matter of Succession of Dunham 393 So. 2d 438 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
It is true that the force of Barbet was somewhat eroded so far as immovables are concerned by subsequent decisions, , (1948).
Valhi, Inc. v. Zapata Corp. 365 So. 2d 867 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Custom Financing of Bossier City, Inc. v. Williams 340 So. 2d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Superior Oil Company v. Cox 307 So. 2d 350 La. 1975
(1948), the Court said: "* * * On the contrary, compliance with the condition only renders the result executory ; makes the reciprocal promises absolute and establishes the rights and liabilities of the parties as of the date of the agreement."
B. Segall Company, Inc. v. Trahan 290 So. 2d 854 La. 1974
Morgavi v. Mumme 270 So. 2d 540 La. 1972
Art. 2133; , (1948); Brown v. Vernon Parish School Board, 209 La.
Lambert v. Succession of DeHass 271 So. 2d 910 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
“ , (1948), the Louisiana Supreme Court had this to say: “ ‘The proposition advanced by plaintiff has been many times made and we find consistent rejection of it in a long line of authorities.
Gibsland Supply Co. v. American Employers Ins. Co. 242 So. 2d 310 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971
(1948), the Louisiana Supreme Court had this to say: "The proposition advanced by plaintiff has been many times made and we find consistent rejection of it in a long line of authorities.
Fontenot v. Lewis 215 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1968
LeBleu v. LeBleu 206 So. 2d 551 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
(1948), and Chicago Mill & in which the courts upheld and enforced agreements which had been challenged as being contrary to public policy in that they extended mineral servitudes beyond the ten year prescription period.
McMikle v. O'Neal 183 So. 2d 377 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
1026 , , 645 (1957); , (1948); Tri-State Transit co. of Louisiana v. Sunshine Bus Lines, 181 La.
Vallee v. Vallee 180 So. 2d 570 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
Walker v. Jim Austin Motor Company 162 So. 2d 135 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Campbell v. Thomas 140 So. 2d 163 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Chicago Mill and Lumber Co. v. Ayer Timber Co. 131 So. 2d 635 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
We feel that the case of Ober v. Williams, 1948, *641 , , is the case most appropriate to the factual situation herein.
Champagne v. Lepine 130 So. 2d 753 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
Wampler v. Wampler 118 So. 2d 423 La. 1960
Scott v. Apgar 113 So. 2d 457 La. 1959
Merritt v. Hays 111 So. 2d 771 La. 1959
Davis v. Reynolds 96 So. 2d 368 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1957
Day v. Roberts, La.App., .
Agurs v. Holt 95 So. 2d 644 La. 1957
Agurs v. Holt 95 So. 2d 644 La. 1957
Stack v. De Soto Properties, Inc. 59 So. 2d 428 La. 1952
Article 2462, Civil Code; , .
Douglas v. Murphy 51 So. 2d 310 La. 1950
Stephens v. Bulkley 41 So. 2d 683 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
In the case of Ober v. Williams, et al., , , 221, the Supreme Court again held that a written instrument does not convey title to real estate when it *Page 687 contains no language directly conveying title and when a reading of the instrument shows that a subsequent deed is intended by the parties.