Houston v. Schluntz

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Houston v. Schluntz

208 So. 2d 335, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 5450

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedMarch 4, 1968

DocketNo. 7285

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 208 So. 2d 335 (Houston v. Schluntz) 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

Houston v. Schluntz, 208 So. 2d 335, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 5450 (La. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

BAILES, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the companion case of Attaway et ux. v. Schluntz et al., La.App., 208 So.2d 332, the judgment of the trial court rejecting the demands [336]*336of the plaintiff, Ralph D. Houston, individually and as administrator of the estate of his minor son, James F. Houston, against E. K. Schluntz and his public liability insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, is affirmed at his cost.

Affirmed.

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

BAILES, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the companion case of Attaway et ux. v. Schluntz et al., La.App., 208 So.2d 332, the judgment of the trial court rejecting the demands [336]*336of the plaintiff, Ralph D. Houston, individually and as administrator of the estate of his minor son, James F. Houston, against E. K. Schluntz and his public liability insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, is affirmed at his cost.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 So. 2d 335, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 5450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houston-v-schluntz-lactapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack