Legal Opinion
Clarke v. Patton
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Decided February 3, 1944No. 2609PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In this suit, plaintiff is seeking to recover for damages to his automobile allegedly arising out of a collision between his automobile and that of defendant. In his petition, he alleges that he is a resident of the State of Ohio. By alleging that defendant, Eddie L. Patton, is a non-resident of the State of Louisiana, being a resident of Kennard, Texas, plaintiff obtained a writ of attachment by virtue of which defendant's automobile was seized.
A motion to dissolve the writ of attachment was filed by the defendant, in which he sets out: (1) That the said automobile was exempt from seizure…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Succession of SimmonsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1903
- Texana Oil & Refining Co. v. BelchicSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- First Nat. Bank v. HintonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1909
- First Nat. Bank of Shreveport v. PiersonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1933
- Rappeport v. PattenLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1941
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In Re KennedyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1978
- Laurencic v. JonesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1965
- Dealers Building Material Supply Co. v. CampbellLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1956
- CHASHOUDIAN v. PateLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2009