Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Joseph, 237 So. 2d 663.
-
Terri L. Babineaux v. Douglas W. Stonicher
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
629, (1970), the Louisiana Supreme Court noted the benefit to the public of keeping valuable property in commerce when specifically discussing a right-of-passage predial servitude for the benefit of a dominate estate to have access to a public road.
- Corley v. C & J Frye Properties, LLC 176 So. 3d 439 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
- Phipps v. Schupp 163 So. 3d 212 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
-
Thibco Investments, LLC v. Robert Thibodeaux
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
2 Although not directly analogous to the facts of this case, ( the supreme court noted that there is a strong public policy discouraging landlocking.
-
Thibco Investments, LLC v. Thibodeaux
102 So. 3d 1043
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
629 , (1970)), the supreme court noted that there is a strong public policy discouraging landlocking.
-
Elston v. Montgomery
70 So. 3d 824
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
629 , (1970), and “in the manner which he may deem most profitable,” Littlejohn v. Cox, 15 La.
-
Mandy Louise Lacroix Perdue v. Danny Doyle Cruse
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
629, (1970), and Littlejohn v. Cox, 15 La.Ann.
-
Perdue v. Cruse
38 So. 3d 1235
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
629 , (1970), and Littlejohn v. Cox, 15 La.Ann.
- Spruell v. Dudley 951 So. 2d 339 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
-
Kevin Michael May v. Thomas H. Miller
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
629, (1970), the owner of an enclosed estate does not have discretion to choose which estate should be burdened with a legal right of passage.
-
May v. Miller
941 So. 2d 661
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
629 , (1970), the owner of an enclosed estate does not have discretion to choose which estate should be burdened with a legal right of passage.
- CASH POINT PLANTATION EQUESTRIAN v. Shelton 920 So. 2d 974 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
-
Gary Roland Bailey v. Neil Douglas McNeely, Et Ux.
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
629, (1970) went on to note that “[a]s land becomes less available, more necessary for public habitation, use, and support, it would run contrary to public policy to encourage landlocking of such a valuable asset and forever removing it from commerce and from public as well as private benefit.” LeBlanc, 615 So.2d
-
Bailey v. McNeely
918 So. 2d 1124
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
629 , (1970) went on to note that " [a]s land becomes less available, more necessary for public habitation, use, and support, it would run contrary to public policy to encourage landlocking of such a valuable asset and forever removing it from commerce and from public as well as private benefit."
-
Gatson v. Bailey
907 So. 2d 859
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
629, 641 , (1970), speaking broadly about the importance of the Civil Code's legal servitude for the right of passage to the enclosed estate, our supreme court observed: While Article 699 [now La.
- Kavanagh v. Bowers 826 So. 2d 1165 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
-
Davis v. Culpepper
794 So. 2d 68
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
629 , (1970), the owner of an enclosed estate does not have discretion to choose which estate should be burdened with a legal right of passage.
-
Stephenson v. Nations Credit Financial Services Corp.
754 So. 2d 1011
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
629, 642-43 , (1970); A.N.
- Braxton v. Guillory 721 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
-
Tessier v. Medical Center of Baton Rouge
636 So. 2d 928
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
629 , (1970), we recognized the importance of this servitude for the benefit not only of the landowner by permitting full utility of his land, but also of the public by keeping valuable property in commerce....
-
LeBlanc v. Thibodeaux
615 So. 2d 295
La. 1993
629 , had determined that it was against public policy to encourage landlocking of property.
-
LeBlanc v. Thibodeaux
595 So. 2d 1213
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
629 , (1970), then applied an equitable balance of interests test and determined that plaintiffs were entitled to a right of passage under La.C.C.
- Salvex, Inc. v. Lewis 546 So. 2d 1309 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
-
Pearson v. Theriot
534 So. 2d 35
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
629 , (1970); Vermilion Parish School Board v. Broussard, 263 La.
-
Bouser v. Morgan
520 So. 2d 937
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
629 , (1970), we recognized the importance of this servitude for the benefit not only of the landowner by permitting full utility of his land but also of the public by keeping valuable property in commerce.
- Anderton v. Akin 493 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
-
Lambert Development Co. v. State
482 So. 2d 859
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
629 , (1970) for the proposition that the subject property is an “enclosed estate” within the meaning of LSA-C.C.
- Kizer v. Lilly 471 So. 2d 716 La. 1985
-
Stuckey v. Collins
464 So. 2d 346
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
when discussing the policies behind Article 699 (now Article 689), stated: "As land becomes less available, more necessary for public habitation, use, and support, it would run contrary to public policy to encourage landlocking of such a valuable asset and forever removing it from commerce and from public a
- Tusson v. Hero Land Co. 446 So. 2d 346 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
-
Rieger v. Norwood
401 So. 2d 1272
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
629 , (1970); Morgan v. Culpepper, *1274 (La.App.
-
Finn v. Eoff
368 So. 2d 199
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
629 , (1970), recognized the importance of the servitude to the landowner by allowing full utility of his land and to the public by keeping valuable property in commerce.
- STATE DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS v. Romano 343 So. 2d 222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
-
Morgan v. Culpepper
324 So. 2d 598
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1976
629 , (1970), we recognized the importance of this servitude for the benefit not only of the landowner by permitting full utility of his land but also of the public by keeping valuable property in commerce.
- Patin v. Richard 291 So. 2d 879 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
-
Vermilion Parish School Board v. Broussard
270 So. 2d 523
La. 1972
629 , (1970), we recognized the importance of this servitude for the benefit not only of the landowner by permitting full utility of his land but also of the public by keeping valuable property in commerce.
- Lafayette Airport Commission v. Roy 265 So. 2d 459 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1972