Home/Supreme Court of Louisiana/Mayo v. Stoessell

Mayo v. Stoessell

281 So. 2d 743, 1973 La. LEXIS 6232
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedAugust 21, 1973
DocketNo. 53701
StatusPublished

This text of 281 So. 2d 743 (Mayo v. Stoessell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mayo v. Stoessell, 281 So. 2d 743, 1973 La. LEXIS 6232 (La. 1973).

Opinion

In re: Edward M. Mayo, Administrator of the Estate of Mabel Arnett Putnam and Arthur F. Dumaine, Administrator of the Estate of Israel Mercer Putnam applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Tammany. 277 So.2d 520.

Writ denied. The result is correct.

TATE, J., concurs, noting that the issue as to the adjudication for 1933 taxes was raised in the lower court, but is without merit since the redemption in 1935 was valid under Act 14, 4th extra session of 1935; so such 1933 adjudication had no effect on the validity of the present tax sales for 1937 and 1939 taxes.

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

Related

Mayo v. Stoessell
277 So. 2d 520 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
281 So. 2d 743, 1973 La. LEXIS 6232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayo-v-stoessell-la-1973.