Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hoth v. Schmidt, 56 So. 2d 412.

13 citing documents.

Lowell Ebert, Et Ux v. Gary B. Howell La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
Chauvin v. Bohn 411 So. 2d 442 La. 1982
249 , (1951); Fox v. Succession of Broussard, 161 La.
Poissenot v. Guildcraft Homes, Inc. 394 So. 2d 660 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
249 , (1951); Parker Mead, (La.App.
Valley Land Corporation v. Fielder 242 So. 2d 358 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971
249 , (1951); DiCristina v. Weiser, 215 La.
Thompson v. Bullock 236 So. 2d 892 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
249 , ; Di Cristina v. Weiser, 215 La.
Johnson v. Thompson 229 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
249 , (1951); Stockelback v. Bradley, 159 La.
Ezell v. Loucks 167 So. 2d 452 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
249 , .” Defendants’ demand that Plaintiff’s deposit be forfeited was properly rejected by the Trial Judge.
Elliott v. Dupuy 127 So. 2d 260 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
Zemurray v. Boe 105 So. 2d 243 La. 1958
Everhardt v. Sighinolfi 95 So. 2d 632 La. 1957
249 , , primarily relied on by him, the involved contracts of sale contained a provision (not found in the instant agreement) reciting as follows: "In the event that purchaser fails to comply with this agreement within the time specified, the vendor shall have the right, either to declare the deposit, ipso facto, forfeited
Everhardt v. Sighinolfi 95 So. 2d 632 La. 1957
249 , , primarily relied on by him, the involved contracts of sale contained a provision (not found in the instant agreement) reciting as follows: “In the event that purchaser fails to comply with this agreement within the time specified, the vendor shall have the right, either to declare the deposit, ipso facto, forfeited
Harrell v. Stumberg 57 So. 2d 692 La. 1952
Harrell v. Stumberg 57 So. 2d 692 La. 1952