Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Roberts v. Medlock, 148 So. 474.
- Lydia Degueyter v. First American Title Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
- Degueyter v. First American Title Co. 230 So. 3d 652 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
- Latter & Blum, Inc. v. Ditta 223 So. 3d 54 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
- Deleon v. WSIS, INC. 728 So. 2d 1046 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
-
Bart v. Wysocki
558 So. 2d 1326
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
352 So.2d at 388 (La.App.
- Zatzkis v. Fuselier 398 So. 2d 1284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
- Vallery v. Belgard 379 So. 2d 1201 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
- Langford Land Co. v. Dietzgen Corp. 352 So. 2d 386 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
- Solar Gen. Contractor, Ltd. v. Urban Redevelopments, Inc. 345 So. 2d 558 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
- White v. Batson 317 So. 2d 205 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
-
Morgavi v. Mumme
254 So. 2d 278
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
It must be a record title free of rational substantial doubt to the extent that a purchaser should feel that he can hold his purchase in peace without the probability of attack and with reasonable assurance that it will be readily salable on the open market.” It becomes clear that not all seeming defects render a title unmerchantable.
- Young v. Stevens 209 So. 2d 25 La. 1968
-
Harper v. Celotex Corp.
183 So. 2d 350
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
52 ; Roberts v. Medlock, La.App., ; the latter two decisions being to the effect that an interest in a succession may be sold, includ- *355 mg' title to real estate, without a particular description of the real estate.