Pokorny v. Pratt
Citations
- 110 La. 609
- 34 So. 706
- 1903 La. LEXIS 683
Syllabus
<p>ADJOINING LANDOWNERS — PARTY WALL-DAMAGES — ESTOPPEL.</p> <p>1. There was no special warranty clause contained in the deed under which plaintiff holds, and therefore she can claim no damages of a personal nature of a date preceding the sale, even if any were due.</p> <p>2. Plaintiff did not seek to stop defendant’s work, as she was authorized to do under article 864 of the Civil Code.</p> <p>Besides, she claims damages, and not the property, in another suit, and concluded through her agent that it was advisable in her interest to let the wall be built without stopping the work.</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.
- noting that treatment notes stating that plaintiff was “totally disabled appear[ed] to conflict with . . . treatment notes which . . . reveal[ed] that [the p]laintiff’s condition was improving”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Breaux
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.