Denkmann Associates v. IP Timberlands Operating Co.
Denkmann Associates v. IP Timberlands Operating Co., 710 So. 2d 1091 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998).
Cited by
- Terrence R. Scott v. David L. Browne, Cynthia M. Cimino, and Browne Law, LLC La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
- Olivia Lyn Bean and Treshawn Dardie Davis v. Emily Pounds and Reid Pounds La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
- Wicker v. La. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. 257 So. 3d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
- Palermo v. Century Indem. Co. 248 So. 3d 462 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
- Robert Frank Palermo v. Century Indemnity Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
- Matherne v. TWH Holding, L.L.C. 136 So. 3d 854 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
- Pierrotti v. Johnson 91 So. 3d 1056 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
- Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities v. All Taxpayers 56 So. 3d 1194 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
- Landry v. Town of Livingston Police Department 54 So. 3d 772 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
- Insurance Co. of North America v. Louisiana Power & Light Co. 10 So. 3d 264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
- Lennix v. Big 3 Industries of Air Liquide 735 So. 2d 78 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
Opinion text
| iFITZSIMMONS, Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur in the majority’s finding that res judicata is not apposite in the instant case. The determination of the validity of the option clause in our prior adjudication is separate and distinguishable from an assessment of the process to be employed in the determi *1098 nation of the price pursuant to the option agreement. However, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority’s dicta that expresses uncertainty as to whether the doctrine of confusion can be applied where it appears that the vendor has received the total consideration due him in advance. If the lessee becomes the owner of the property at issue, the doctrine of confusion is applicable.