Kimbrough v. Hirsch
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
liPICKETT, Judge.
The Plaintiffs appeal a judgment rendered by the trial court. In this boundary action, the trial court found that the eastern boundary of the Plaintiffs’ property and the western boundary of the. Defendants’ property had never been established. The trial court further found that the Plaintiffs were the owners of the western 100 acres of the original contiguous tract originally owned by the Plaintiffs and Defendants’ ancestor in title. Thereafter, the trial court ordered a survey to establish a boundary with the costs to be shared by both parties. For the reasons set forth…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Rosell v. EscoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1989
- Stobart v. State Through DOTDSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
- Mart v. HillSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1987
- Sistler v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1990
- Housley v. CeriseSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1991
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Broussard v. Union Pacific Resources Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2001
- Bourgeois v. Linden InterestLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2012
- Marion E. Bourgeois v. Linden InterestLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2012