controversy bar in Louisiana

2019Cat’s Meow, Inc., p. 9, 720 So.2d at 1194 .

1996In Cambridge Corner Corporation v. Menard, 525 So.2d at 530 , the Louisiana Supreme Court addressed the retroactivity of a prior amendment to LSA-C.C.P. art. 1732(1), which increased the amount in controversy requirement from $10,000 to $20,000.

1996The court in Cambridge Corner Corporation v. Menard, 525 So.2d at 530-31 , held: Article 1732 is not an interpretive law and we cannot say that it is merely procedural either.

1981As noted in Williams v. City of Shreveport, 241 So.2d 598 (La.App. 2nd Cir. 1970), “the rule requires no citation of authority to the effect that when a petition discloses a cause of action on any phase of the controversy an exception to that effect should not be sustained”.

1970The terms “successors” or ayans cause have sometimes been used in our jurisprudence interchangeably with the word “privies.” In Hargrave v. Mouton, 109 La. 533 , 33 So. 590 (1903), the Supreme Court stated: “The parties are the same in legal contemplation, for it is a rule of law that a final judgment rendered by a competent court on the merits of a controversy is a bar to any future suit between the parties litigant, or their privies, upon the same cause of action.

1970The terms “successors” or ayans cause have sometimes been used in our jurisprudence interchangeably with the word “privies.” In Hargrave v. Mouton, 109 La. 533 , 33 So. 590 (1903), the Supreme Court stated: “The parties are the same in legal contemplation, for it is a rule of law that a final judgment rendered by a competent court on the merits of a controversy is a bar to any future suit between the parties litigant, or their privies, upon the same cause of action.

1970Heroman v. Institute, 34 La.Ann. 805 ; Sewell v. Scott, 35 La.Ann. 553 .

1946Murff v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 180 La. 664 , 157 So. 383 .

1946Murff v. Louisiana Highway Commission, 180 La. 664 , 157 So. 383 .