Legal Opinion
Latter & Blum, Inc. v. Obolensky
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Decided January 8, 1974No. 5876PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SAMUEL, Judge.
Plaintiff is a real estate brokerage firm. The defendant is the owner and lessor of a building located at 516-524 Royal Street in New Orleans. The object of plaintiff’s suit is to recover brokerage commissions claimed by it under an April 25, 1949 agreement between it and the defendant. A summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff was remanded by this court for further proceedings.1 Following remand and after a trial on the merits, the district court rendered judgment ordering defendant to pay plaintiff brokerage commissions of 6% of the rental received for the 10 year period…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Latter & Blum, Inc. v. Von RuekfrangLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1971
- Ernest A. Carrere's Sons v. LevyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1939
3Cited by5 opinions
- Meaghan Frances Hardcastle v. De ParisLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2005
- Miceli v. Armstrong World IndustriesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1997
- Gattuso v. Mothe Life Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1991
- Schoemann v. Skate Country, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1984
- Latter & Blum, Inc. v. ObolenskySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1974