Chandler v. Rushing
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., January 9, 1956 84 So. 2d 849; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., May 14, 1923 5 Pelt. 826; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., October 17, 1921 5 Pelt. 830; La., July 1, 1884 36 La. Ann. 987; La. Ct. App. 3d Cir., October 7, 1981 405 So. 2d 624; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., September 12, 1978 362 So. 2d 1182
Chandler v. Rushing, 251 So. 2d 423 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971).
Cited by
- Smith v. Chandler 251 So. 2d 417 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Smith v. Chandler 251 So. 2d 417
Opinion text
TUCKER, Judge. Since there is one of the six estates to which this servitude is owed involved in our Docket No. 8387, one-sixth (i/¿) of the total damages of $500.00 awarded here are attributable to the defendant in this suit. For the reasons assigned in the suit entitled Smith et al. v. Chandler et ux, No. 8386 on the docket of this court, 251 So.2d 417 , the judgment of the trial court is amended by increasing the indemnification award for the damages caused by the creation of the servitude from Thirty-Two and 33/100 ($32.33) Dollars to Eighty-Three and 33/100 ($83.33) Dollars, and in all other respects the judgment is affirmed. The defendant, Mrs. Lurline W. Rushing, will post the costs of this appeal. Affirmed as amended.