Richardson v. Flowers

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Richardson v. Flowers

1 Gunby 76

DecidedJuly 1, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Gunby 76 (Richardson v. Flowers) 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

Richardson v. Flowers, 1 Gunby 76 (La. Ct. App. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Gunby, J.

Where a sale is attacked as simulated, the burden of proof is on the vendee, if the vendor has remained in possession after the sale; otherwise, if the vendee has gone into possession.

2. Where the witnesses swear positively to the bona fides of a transaction, the circumstantial evidence against them must be strong, clear and without a missing link, to overthrow their statements, however suspicious and interested they may be.

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

Gunby, J.

Where a sale is attacked as simulated, the burden of proof is on the vendee, if the vendor has remained in possession after the sale; otherwise, if the vendee has gone into possession.

2. Where the witnesses swear positively to the bona fides of a transaction, the circumstantial evidence against them must be strong, clear and without a missing link, to overthrow their statements, however suspicious and interested they may be.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Gunby 76, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-flowers-lactapp-1885.