Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Hebert

210 So. 2d 378, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 4604
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided May 3, 1968·No. No. 2252·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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

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

210 So. 2d 378 (Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Hebert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Frugé
210 So. 2d 375 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1968)