Lisso & Bro. v. Unknown Owner
Citations
- 114 La. 392
- 38 So. 282
- 1905 La. LEXIS 473
Syllabus
<p>TAX TITLE — SUIT TO QUIET — DEFENSES.</p> <p>1. Where the former owner, who is brought into court under Act No. 101 of 1898, in an action to quiet a tax title, prima_ facie valid, makes no attack thereon, such title becomes conclusively valid, and should be quieted.</p> <p>2. Where a defendant, not the former owner, who is brought into court under Act N®. 101, p. 127, of 1898, in an action to quiet a tax title prima facie valid, has in bad faith, and under a mere pretense of title, acquired possession of the property at a date subsequent to the registry, and with knowledge, of the tax title, he has no standing to sue for the nullity of such title, and it should be quieted.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Oourt.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- dismissing a claim of “misappropriation of a trade secret under New York law”
- dismissing allegations that defendant contacted, solicited, and obtained orders from “customers”
- “Courts often analyze misappropriation of trade secret and confidential information and unfair competition claims together.”
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.