Illinois Cent. R. v. St. Louis & San Francisco R.
Citations
- 124 La. 54
- 49 So. 976
- 1909 La. LEXIS 424
Syllabus
<p>1. Railroads (§ 139*) — Contracts as to Terminals — Actions for Breach — Pleading.</p> <p>The judgment of the district court sustaining an exception of no cause of action is affirmed.</p> <p>2. Action (§ 6*) — Grounds—Determination of Rights of Parties — Construction of Contract.</p> <p>The court is not called upon to fix the rights and obligations of the parties to an alleged contract, unless a decision on those points is invoked incidentally and in aid of a present controversy as arising under that contract. It should not be called on to determine in anticipation of such a controversy what the rights and obligations of parties are or may be, in order to malm a decree presently rendered tbe basis of a future suit and judgment.</p> <p>(Syllabus by tbe Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that “standing alone,” inconsistencies in former spouses’ testimony and documentation “did not amount to substantial and probative evidence of marriage fraud”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Nicholls
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.