Hailey v. Panno

22 Citing cases

  1. Cavaness v. Norton

    694 So. 2d 1174 (La. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 3 times

    A street impliedly dedicated is subject not to ownership, but to a servitude of use. Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1985); Becnel v. Citrus Lands of Louisiana, Inc., 429 So.2d 459 (La.App. 4 Cir.), writ denied, 437 So.2d 1147 (La. 1983).

  2. N. Woodlawn Invs. v. Grp. 1 Realty Inc. of Del.

    CIVIL ACTION CASE NO. 21-1107 SECTION: "G" (E.D. La. Jul. 13, 2021)

    4 Cir. 10/03/01); 804 So.2d 78, reversed on other grounds, 02-0485 (La. 4/24/02); 814 So.2d 1289; Barrilleaux v. NPC, Inc., 97-2040 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/29/97); 704 So.2d 449, writ denied, 99-1002 (La. 05/28/99); 743 So.2d 672; Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1985)). Irreparable injury is that which “cannot be undone through monetary damages.”

  3. In re Coupel

    556 B.R. 746 (E.D. La. 2016)   Cited 3 times
    Holding under 11 U.S.C. § 362, but on reasoning equally resonant under § 362, that automatic stay did not apply to post-petition claim for attorney's fees pursued in state-court litigation arising from bankrupt debtor's post-petition conduct

    Under Louisiana law, a predial servitude runs with the land and is inseparable from the dominant estate. Textron Fin. Corp. v. Retif Oil & Fuel, LLC , 342 Fed.Appx. 29, 33 (5th Cir.2009) ; Hailey v. Panno , 472 So.2d 97, 99–100 (La.Ct.App.1985). A servitude, or real right of passage, does not belong to the owner of the dominant estate but, instead, to the dominant estate itself.

  4. Richard v. Hall

    874 So. 2d 131 (La. 2004)   Cited 270 times
    Finding that lessee was not a "commercial enterprise" under § 9:2795 because the lessee did not utilize the premises for commercial profit

    Defendants further stress that personal servitudes of right of use affecting immovable property must be in writing. Langevin v. Howard, 363 So.2d 1209, 1214 (La.Ct.App. 2 Cir. 1978) writ denied 366 So.2d 560 (La. 1979); Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97, 99 (La.Ct.App. 5 Cir. 1985). The agreement between SSI and Loch Leven was not formalized in a written document, therefore it cannot be considered a right of use.

  5. Lake Terrace Prop. Owners v. New Orleans

    567 So. 2d 69 (La. 1990)   Cited 15 times
    In Lake Terrace Property Owners Ass'n v. City of New Orleans, 567 So.2d 69, 73 (La. 1990), the Louisiana Supreme Court noted that "a home rule charter may include the exercise of any power necessary or proper for management of its affairs that is not inconsistent with general statutory law or the constitution."

    The act of dedication executed by the board, along with the recordation of the subdivision plat, constitutes substantial compliance with the procedures for dedication of property for public use under La.R.S. 33:5051. Garret v. Pioneer Production Corp., 390 So.2d 851, 856 (La. 1980); Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97, 100 (La.Ct.App. 5th Cir. 1985). Recently in Coliseum Square Ass'n v. City of New Orleans, 544 So.2d 351 (La. 1989), we held that the City of New Orleans had the legal authority to execute a long term lease of a public street that was no longer needed for public purposes.

  6. Wechem, Inc. v. Evans

    274 So. 3d 877 (La. Ct. App. 2019)   Cited 8 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Wechem, Inc. v. Evans, 274 So.3d 877 (La.App. 5th Cir. 2019), the court found emails transmitted fulfilled the contractual requirement of a writing signed by the defendant, so there was no specific holding that the contract was modified by acquiescence.

    It is well established that an applicant seeking a preliminary injunction need only make a prima facie showing that he will prevail on the merits; thus, less proof is required than in an ordinary proceeding for a permanent injunction where the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence. SeeSorrento Companies, Inc. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc. , 04-1884 (La. App. 1 Cir. 9/23/05), 916 So.2d 1156, 1163, writ denied , 05-2326 (La. 3/17/06), 925 So.2d 541 ; State through Louisiana State Bd. of Examiners of Psychologists of the Dep't of Health and Human Services v. Atterberry , 95-0391 (La. App. 1 Cir. 11/9/95), 664 So.2d 1216, 1220 ; and Hailey v. Panno , 472 So.2d 97, 99 (La. App. 5th Cir. 1985). Moreover, La. R.S. 23:921 contemplates that the parishes specified in the Agreement must be parishes where the ex-employer actually has a location or customers.

  7. Timmer v. Bynog

    66 So. 3d 590 (La. Ct. App. 2011)

    An applicant for a preliminary injunction need make only a prima facie showing that he will prevail on the merits; thus less proof is required than in an ordinary proceeding for permanent injunction. Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1985). However, a preliminary injunction brought pursuant to La.C.C.P. Art. 3663 does not require a showing of irreparable injury. Hailey v. Panno, supra; Monroe Real Estate Development v. Sunshine Equipment Company, Inc., 35,555 (La.App. 2 Cir. 1/23/02), 805 So.2d 1200; Terre Aux Boeufs Land Company, Inc. v. J.R. Gray Barge Company, 2000-2754 (La. App. 4th Cir. 11/14/01), 803 So.2d 86, writdenied, 2001-3292 (La.3/8/02), 811 So.2d 887.

  8. La. Granite v. Granite Count.

    47 So. 3d 573 (La. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 15 times
    Reciting that Louisiana trademark law, like federal law, is dependent on use rather than registration

    Thus, because an applicant for a preliminary injunction need make only a prima facie showing, less proof is required that in an ordinary proceeding for a permanent injunction. Gaumnitz v. Williamson, 36,177 (La.App.2d Cir. 8/14/02), 824 So.2d 531; Monroe Real Estate Dev't Co. v. Sunshine Equipment Co., 35,555 (La.App.2d Cir. 1/23/02), 805 So.2d 1200; Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1985). For purposes of determining whether preliminary injunction is warranted, "irreparable injury" means that the moving party cannot be adequately compensated in money damages for his injury or suffers injuries which cannot be measured by pecuniary standards.

  9. Gaumnitz v. Williamson

    824 So. 2d 531 (La. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 8 times

    Holmes v. Peoples State Bank of Many, 32,749 (La.App. 2d Cir. 3/3/00), 753 So.2d 1006. An applicant for a preliminary injunction need make only a prima facie showing that he will prevail on the merits; thus less proof is required than in an ordinary proceeding for permanent injunction. Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1985). However, a preliminary injunction brought pursuant to La.C.C.P. Art. 3663 does not require a showing of irreparable injury. Hailey v. Panno, supra; Monroe Real Estate Development v. Sunshine Equipment Company, Inc., 35,555 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1/23/02), 805 So.2d 1200 ; Terre Aux Boeufs Land Company, Inc. v. J. R. Gray Barge Company, 2000-2754 (La.App. 4th Cir. 11/14/01), 803 So.2d 86, writ denied, 2001-3292 (La. 3/8/02), 811 So.2d 887.

  10. Monroe Real E. v. Sunshine

    805 So. 2d 1200 (La. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 17 times

    Wied v. TRCM, LLC, 30,106 (La.App. 2d Cir. 07/24/97), 698 So.2d 685; Louisiana Gaming Corp. v. Rob's Mini-Mart, Inc., 27,920 (La.App. 2d Cir. 01/24/96), 666 So.2d 1268. An applicant for preliminary injunction need make only a prima facie showing that he will prevail on the merits; thus, less proof is required than in an ordinary proceeding for permanent injunction. Hailey v. Panno, 472 So.2d 97 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1985). After reviewing the record before us, we conclude that the trial court erred in requiring Sunshine to demonstrate irreparable injury under the general preliminary injunction requirements and in failing to apply the provisions of La.C.C.P. art. 3663 to the analysis of the facts before it.