Legal Opinion · Concurrence

General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Henderson

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 25, 1969No. 2895Published

1ConcurrenceTate, Judge

With some reservation I concur in the holding that, under the pleadings, the debtor cannot prove he did not receive notice of seizure required by law, LSA-C.C.P. Art. 2721.

The narrow basis of the majority holding is that the evidence attacking the return because not served on the debtor personally is not admissible, since the allegation of the petition attacked service of the notice of seizure on other grounds (i. e., that it had not been served at the debtor’s domicile or residence). Strictly construing the pleadings, this technical ruling may be correct.

However, from the colloquy of counsel…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. League Central Credit Union v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1968
  2. Myrtle Grove Packing Company v. MonesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1954
  3. Logwood v. LogwoodSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1936
  4. Wilson v. KingSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1955
  5. Dickey v. PollockLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1938

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API