DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, Inc., 149 So. 278.

14 citing documents.

  • EVANGELINE FEDERAL SAV. & LOAN v. Catha 520 So. 2d 1314 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
    In Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, Inc., (La.App.
  • Color Connection, Inc. v. Juneau 505 So. 2d 914 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
    2d Cir.1987); Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, Inc., (La.App.
  • Moreland v. Green 501 So. 2d 975 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
    Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, Inc., (La.App.
  • Gulling v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Company 228 So. 2d 750 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
    446 ; Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, La.App., ; Mella v. Continental Emsco, La.App., , (writs ref.
  • Flintkote Company v. Thomas 223 So. 2d 676 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
    403 , our predecessor court expressed the opinion that Article 2093 of the Civil Code should not be so strictly construed as to require that such words as "in solido" or "solidary" must appear in the contract in order to create solidary liability, citing Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, La.App., , in which that court said that it is sufficient if all of the essential elements are present and the document evidences an intent on the part of the parties to be solidarily liable.
  • Granger v. Nichols Construction Corp. 202 So. 2d 337 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    446 , Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, La.App., , Mella v. Continental Emsco, La.App., , writ refused, 249 La.
  • Burch v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. 172 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    2 Cir., ; North British Mercantile Ins.
  • Hidalgo v. Dupuy 122 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    2 Cir., ; North British Mercantile Ins.
  • Ford v. Louisiana & A. Ry. Co. 196 So. 403 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
    335 ; Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, Inc., La.App., ; Hoy v. T. S. Grayson Lbr.
  • Jaume v. Maison Blanche Co. 193 So. 905 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
    35 ; Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, Inc., La.App., ; Pitts v. M. W. Kellogg Company, Inc. et al., La.App., 186 So.
  • Rochell v. Shreveport Grain & Elevator Co. 188 So. 429 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
    88 ; Dodd v. Lakeview Motors, La.App., .
  • George Moroy Cigar & Tobacco Co. v. Henriques 184 So. 403 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
    We agree with what was said by the Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit in Dodd v. Lake View Motors, Inc., , 280: • “We do not think this last article [Art. 2093] means that the words ‘in solido’ must necessarily appear in the contract, agreement or obligation.
  • Tierce v. United Gas Public Service Co. 164 So. 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
    this court held that the burden of showing the interruption of prescription is on the plaintiff when on the face of the pleadings prescription has run.
  • Myers v. Rothschild 155 So. 785 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
    App.) ; Bernard v. Aetna Ins.