Legal Opinion

Sliman v. Mahtook

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided October 7, 1931No. 802PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLeBLANC, J.

In a former suit between these same parties, judgment had been rendered in favor of the plaintiff, K. Sliman, decreeing him to be the owner of certain property, but there also was a moneyed juugment in favor of the defendant, B. Mahtook, on a reconventional demand, in the sum of $411.65, with interest and costs. Mahtook then obtained a writ of fieri facias on his judgment, under which Sliman’s property was seized and advertised for sale. The latter paid all costs involved in the former suit, and also paid the sum of $150 on account of said judgment. He had in the meantime ¡purchased two…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hart v. PolizzottoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1930
  2. Pattison v. EdmonstonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1849
  3. Hart v. PolizzottoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1930

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Strudwick Funeral Home, Inc. v. Liberty Industrial Life Ins.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1937
  2. Purcell Bank & Trust Co. v. PalmerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  3. Star Shoe Co. v. HendricksLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1950
  4. International Investment & Securities, Inc. v. StinsonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Moore v. GuillotLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API