DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Young v. Reed, 192 So. 780.

15 citing documents.

  • Travelers Insurance Co. v. Harkins 458 So. 2d 632 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • Stutts v. Humphries 408 So. 2d 940 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1981
    9 , (1968); citing Rouyer, et al. v. Carroll, 47 La.Ann.
  • Plaisance v. Collins 365 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
  • Duncan v. Gill 227 So. 2d 376 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
  • Suckle v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company 163 So. 2d 564 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1964
  • Penn v. Burk 152 So. 2d 16 La. 1963
    “Liability for the obligations created by or arising from a joint adventure as between the participants inter se, is to be determined from the character of the business or undertaking engaged in.” Young v. Reed, La.App., .
  • Fossier v. American Printing Co., Ltd. 130 So. 2d 529 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1961
    846 ; W. & W. Oil Co., Inc. v. American Supply Co., La.App., ; Young v. Reed, La.App., .
  • Barrois v. Zeringue 127 So. 2d 790 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    552 ; Morace v. Avoyelles Wholesale Grocery Co., Ltd., La.App., ; Young v. Reed, La.App., .
  • Williamson v. Roberts 103 So. 2d 499 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1958
    228 ; Young v. Reed, La.App.1939, ; Kennedy v. Perry Timber Company, 1951, 219 La.
  • Illinois Central Railroad v. Pope Construction Co. 90 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
    We have no doubt that the liability of joint adventurers is the same as is that of partners and accordingly we agree with the statement of our Brothers of the Second Circuit who, in Young v. Reed, La.App., , said: “ ‘The relation of joint adventurers is governed by the principles which constitute and control the law of partnership.’ ”■ In W & W Oil Co., Inc., v. American Supply.
  • Winsberg v. Winsberg 87 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1956
    228, 231 , as “ ‘a special combination of two or more persons, where in some specific venture a profit is jointly sought without any actual partnership or corporate designation.’” Where there is a relationship, wé agree with our Brothers of the Second Circuit in their statement in Young v. Reed, La.App., , that “ ‘The relation of joint adventurers is governed by the principles which constitute and control the law of partnership.’ ” We think that here there was neither a partnership nor.
  • Harding v. Wattigney 62 So. 2d 190 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    As was said in the case of Young v. Reed, La.App., , 784: "The relations between joint adventures are assimilated to those of partners * * *."
  • Williams v. Jahncke Service 38 So. 2d 400 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
    The Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit, , repeated the identical language concerning the fact that it is not necessary that there be absolute identity of all parties provided there was full right of cross-examination.
  • Morace v. Avoyelles Wholesale Grocery Co. 39 So. 2d 105 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
    App., , and appellants' position herein, rather than being in opposition thereto.
  • W. W. Oil Co. v. American Supply Co. 8 So. 2d 384 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    641 ; and Young v. Reed [La.App.], .