Legal Opinion

Sklar v. Lilly-Thompson Drilling Corp.

District Court, W.D. Louisiana

Decided June 3, 1942No. 622PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PORTERIE, District Judge.

The unpaid vendor of a drilling rig, having taken a.chattel mortgage at time of sale, sues to recover from the purchaser the alleged unpaid purchase price of $42,000, with-the recognition of the privilege of the vendor and of the preference of his mortgage. This phase of the suit gives the court no' issue to decide, as the purchaser (drilling: contractor) has accepted service of the peti*471tion, has merely denied perfunctorily the allegations of the plaintiff, was not represented by counsel at the trial — and the plaintiff at the trial proved the debt. The real issue of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Long Bell Lumber Co. v. S. D. Carr Const. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1931
  2. Rester v. Moody & StewartSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1931
  3. Red River Const. Co. v. Pierce Petroleum CorporationSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1928
  4. State v. SmithSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1928
  5. Bridgeport Machine Co. v. McKnabSupreme Court of Kansas · 1933

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. C.F. Dahlberg & Co., Inc., D/B/A St. Mary Galvanizing Corp., Plaintiff v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1988
  2. Southport Petroleum Co. v. FithianSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1943
  3. Idom v. MossLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API