Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Liles v. Barnhart

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided June 5, 1922No. 24226Published

1Concurrence

ST. PAUL, X

(concurring in part). I respectfully dissent on the point of prescription upon the following grounds: i(1) Where the unlawful act of one person simply damages another without resulting benefit to the wrongdoer, there is a simple tort, and the action for reparation is prescribed by one year. C. C. 3536.(2) But where the unlawful act of one person not only .damages another but also enriches the wrongdoer, there arises an action both ex delicto and quasi ex contractu, and the action to recover the unlawful gain is barred only by the prescription of ten years. See Kohn v. Carrollton,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Heirs of Burney v. LudelingSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1895
  2. Morgan's Louisiana & T. R. & S. S Co. v. StewartSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1907
  3. Kohn v. Mayor of CarrolltonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1855
  4. Gaty, McCune & Co. v. BabersSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1880
  5. McKnight v. CalhounSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1884

2 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