Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Hebert

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Hebert

210 So. 2d 378, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 4604

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedMay 3, 1968

DocketNo. 2252

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 210 So. 2d 378 (Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Hebert) 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

Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Hebert, 210 So. 2d 378, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 4604 (La. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinions

FRUGÉ, Judge.

For reasons given in the consolidated case of Michigan Pipe Line Company v. Frugé, 210 So.2d 375 (La.App. 3d Cir., 1968), it is hereby ordered that this case be remanded to the trial court for the limited purpose of joining Vorice Hebert as a party defendant to this suit. It is further ordered that upon the remand of this case, the trial judge shall receive pleadings and evidence for the purpose of determining what if any, damages Mr. Hebert has sus[379]*379tained to his irrigation system as a result of the expropriation and that the case be resubmitted to this court on briefs as soon as the determination of the above matter is made, so that we may determine the merits of these appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

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

FRUGÉ, Judge.

For reasons given in the consolidated case of Michigan Pipe Line Company v. Frugé, 210 So.2d 375 (La.App. 3d Cir., 1968), it is hereby ordered that this case be remanded to the trial court for the limited purpose of joining Vorice Hebert as a party defendant to this suit. It is further ordered that upon the remand of this case, the trial judge shall receive pleadings and evidence for the purpose of determining what if any, damages Mr. Hebert has sus[379]*379tained to his irrigation system as a result of the expropriation and that the case be resubmitted to this court on briefs as soon as the determination of the above matter is made, so that we may determine the merits of these appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 So. 2d 378, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 4604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michigan-wisconsin-pipe-line-co-v-hebert-lactapp-1968.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack