Legal Opinion
Efner v. Ketteringham
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Decided May 29, 1950No. 39459PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PONDER, Justice.
In this case writs were granted hut limited solely to a consideration of the question as to whether or not attorney fees are allowable.
This is a possessory action instituted by the plaintiff in which he sought to have the court recognize his right to a servitude of drip and drain across defendants’ driveway. With his possessory action, plaintiff coupled a demand for damages, including $500 as attorneys’ fees.
The portion of the opinion of the Court of Appeal which caused us great concern at the time writs were applied for, was the following holding: “Attorney’s fee in a case of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Rhodes v. CollierSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1949
- Cooper v. CappelSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1877
- Whitney-Central Nat. Bank v. SinnottSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1914
- Alfano v. FranekSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1925
- Burglass v. VillereSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1930
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Loeblich v. GarnierLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1959
- Cecil John Ogea v. Loffland Brothers Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Breaux v. SimonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1958
- Chauvin v. La HitteSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1956
- Lloyd v. Merit Loan Company of Shreveport, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1971
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.