Legal Opinion

Modisette & Adams v. Lorenze

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided February 28, 1927No. 28125PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Niell, C. J.

This suit was brought by a law firm claiming $500 for professional services and $72.55 reimbursement for money paid for the defendant’s account. Averring that the defendant was not a resident of the state, the plaintiffs obtained a writ of attachment, by virtue of which the sheriff seized a small tract of land and a lot of drilling machinery, pipe, fittings, etc. An Oklahoma corporation,.. styled Arkansas Valley Oil Company, filed a petition of intervention or third opposition, claiming the property seized, and praying for dissolution of the attachment. The defendant, Lorenze,-, who was then…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hurry v. HurrySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1918
  2. Bilich v. MatheSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1920
  3. Lampton Realty Co. v. KerrSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1920
  4. Boone v. BooneSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Toomer v. BreauxLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1962
  2. Herrmann v. Newark Morning Ledger Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
  3. Stanley v. JonesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1941
  4. Cox v. CashioLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Reading & Bates v. BAKER ENERGY RESOURCESLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1997

1 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