Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State ex rel. Department of Highway v. Guidry, 124 So. 2d 531.

15 citing documents.

State, D.O.T.D. v. Landry 507 So. 2d 252 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Plaintiff contends that where the expropriation is by a public body such as the State of Louisiana the landowner has only a very limited right to contest the necessity of the taking, , (1960).
Wilson v. State ex rel. Louisiana Department & Development Office of Highways 400 So. 2d 740 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
State, Through Dept. of Highways v. Olinkraft, Inc. 350 So. 2d 865 La. 1977
In State of Louisiana, Through the Department of Highways v. Jeanerette Lumber & Shingle Co., Ltd., La., (Nos. 58,437 and 58,438, 1977), the decision in State Through the Department of Highways *869 v. Guidry, , (1960) was reversed.
State, Dept. of Highways v. Jeanerette Lumber & Shingle Co. 350 So. 2d 847 La. 1977
(1960), holding that it was error for the trial judge to reduce the permanent servitude of right of way to a limited servitude for the construction, maintenance and repair, because the extent of the taking by the State is not subject to judicial review.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Jeanerette Lumber & Shingle Co. 335 So. 2d 549 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
1019 , (1958); , (1960).
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Jeanerette Lumber & Shingle Co. 335 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
State, Department of Highways v. Olinkraft, Inc. 333 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
The Supreme Court in the case of State of Louisiana, , (1960) held the Department of Highways has the discretion to determine whether or not full ownership of expropriated land is to be required.
State, Department of Highways v. Lessley 287 So. 2d 792 La. 1973
State v. Webb 209 So. 2d 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
State, , ; State, Through the Department of Highways v. Macaluso, et al., 235 La.
State, Department of Highways v. Mouledous 199 So. 2d 185 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
The same court also held in State, , , that when the Highway Department expropriates property under the provisions of La.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Bordages 156 So. 2d 617 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
360 , ; State, , ; and State, through Department of Highways v. Macaluso, 235 La.
Calhoun v. State 152 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
Our Supreme Court considered the abovequoted section of the Revised Statutes in State, , , where the fee title to a portion of defendant's property was expropriated under the provisions of LSA-R.S.
State Ex Rel. Department of Highways v. Bradford 141 So. 2d 378 La. 1962
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Todd 139 So. 2d 223 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Subsequent to the rendition of judgment by this court writs were applied for and granted by the Supreme Court in the Guidry case ( , ) and our decision was reversed, the court holding that it is discretionary with the Highway Department as to whether full ownership or merely a servitude is necessary.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Waterbury 125 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
See State of Louisiana, through Department of Highways v. Guidry, La., .