State ex rel. Levet v. Lapeyrollerie
Supreme Court of Louisiana
A PPLTCATION for Prohibition. 1. In an action of boundary, the only matter in dispute is the value of the lands included between the two contested lines, and unless relator shows the value of such strip exceeds two thousand dollars, the Supreme Court is without jurisdiction. 35 Ann. 311. 2. In this caso the action partakes of the nature of an action of boundary (only in this sense) that the reports of the parish surveyor chosen by both parties to draw the hound - ary line is…
Read the full summary
A PPLTCATION for Prohibition. 1. In an action of boundary, the only matter in dispute is the value of the lands included between the two contested lines, and unless relator shows the value of such strip exceeds two thousand dollars, the Supreme Court is without jurisdiction. 35 Ann. 311. 2. In this caso the action partakes of the nature of an action of boundary (only in this sense) that the reports of the parish surveyor chosen by both parties to draw the hound - ary line is sought simply to be approved and homologated — both by the allegations and prayer of respondent’s petition. And…
1Opinion of the Court
Tile opinion of tlie Court was delivered by
Roché, J.
The facts are as follows :
At a, sale for partition of a tract of land hitherto owned in indivisión by relator an dtho father of the respondents Lapeyiollerie, the parties hereto purchased two contiguous parcels of the land thus partitioned. With a view to establish proper boundaries between their respective estates they employed a competent surveyor, who found an excess of land beyond the quantity called for by their respective titles. That excess, which was a strip of land twenty feet in width, was awarded by the surveyor to the contiguous…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Parish of Caddo v. Parish of De SotoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1905
- Gasquet v. ConwaySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1906