Grosjean v. Crescent Cigar Tobacco Company

185 So. 716
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedJanuary 23, 1939
DocketNo. 17142.
StatusPublished

This text of 185 So. 716 (Grosjean v. Crescent Cigar Tobacco Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Grosjean v. Crescent Cigar Tobacco Company, 185 So. 716 (La. Ct. App. 1939).

Opinion

JANVIER, Judge.

The issues tendered here, except as to the amount, are identical with those involved in the matter of Alice Lee Gros-jean, Collector of Revenue of the State of Louisiana v. Valloft & Dreux, Inc., 185 So. 711, decided by us this day. In this case there is no contention that there was a fire loss, though, with this single exception, every contention made there is presented here.

For the reasons therein given, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment appealed from he and it is affirmed at the cost of appellant.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Grosjean v. Valloft & Dreux, Inc.
185 So. 711 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 So. 716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grosjean-v-crescent-cigar-tobacco-company-lactapp-1939.