Foote v. Pharr
Citations
- 115 La. 36
- 38 So. 885
- 1905 La. LEXIS 608
Syllabus
<p>PETITORY ACTION — CALLING IN WARRANTY-PROHIBITION.</p> <p>Whilst it is true that “in matters relating to warranty they must be carried before the court having cognizance of the principal action in whieli demands in warranty arise,” it is also true that a demand in warranty in legal contemplation arises in an action only when made by the party who has been sued. Hence the plaintiff in a petitory action has no right to call his vendor in warranty; the court in which such action is brought has no authority to compel the warrantor, who does not reside within its jurisdiction, to litigate in response to such call; and prohibition will issue to stay the attempted exercise of such authority.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- granting employer’s summary judgment motion on seaman status based on uncontroverted record evidence that plaintiff had been permanently reassigned to a non-vessel
- “[This Platform] cannot be classified as a vessel under Fifth Circuit precedent.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Monroe
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.