Kenner v. Cousin
Cases that cite this one
13 later published cases cite this decision.
- Academy Award Products, Inc. v. Bulova Watch Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 1955)
- Tarver v. Quinn (La. 1921)
- Williford v. Grady (La. Ct. App. 1996)
- Escat v. National Bank of Commerce in New Orleans (La. Ct. App. 1973)
- Kihneman v. Humble Oil & Refining Company (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1970)
- Harrison v. Commission Council of Bogalusa (La. Ct. App. 1964)
- Ivey v. Daus (District Court, S.D. New York 1955)
- Leleux v. Viator (La. Ct. App. 1951)
- Moore v. Day Builders Supply Co. (La. Ct. App. 1926)
- Anding v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. (La. Ct. App. 1924)
- Gaiennie v. Druilhet (La. 1918)
- State v. Tomsa (La. 1910)
- State ex rel. Fleming v. Joyce (La. 1909)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff has appealed from a judgment rejecting her demand for damages for an alleged, trespass upon her land. The case presents only questions of fact. The district court found that there was no wanton invasion of the plaintiff’s premises nor damage done. The defendants went upon the premises to make a survey, in obedience of an order of court rendered in a suit then pending; one of the three defendants being the surveyor appointed by the court, and the two other defendants being parties to or interested in the suit. They were accompanied by a deputy sheriff, because the plaintiff had forbidden them to enter upon her land, which was absolutely necessary in order to obey the orders of the court.
The learned counsel for appellant argues that the defendants’ plea of justification, based upon the court’s order for a survey, should not prevail, because it was not urged in the answer to the suit; the answer being merely a denial of each allegation of the petition. That is a matter of little or no importance, because the plaintiff had to prove the' alleged unlawful invasion of her premises, and, in making the proof it came to light that the invasion was not unlawful, but, on the contrary, warranted by the court’s order for a survey.
The judgment is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.