Case law

Smith v. K-Mart Corp.

712 So. 2d 1042 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 20, 1998

Testimony and evidence at trial established that Ms. … The statute provides immunity only to those merchants who have conducted a reasonable post-detention inquiry. Derouen v. Miller, 614 So.2d 1304 (La.App. 3d Cir.1993).

Allstate Enterprises, Inc. v. Brown

907 So. 2d 904 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 29, 2005

Accordingly, we find no direct protection for Allstate under the statutory immunity of La. R.S. 9:2771. … The alleged problem with the garage staircase was not clearly established. Greg Brown was advised to alter the stairs, and Maroney's testimony was not convincing of the need to rebuild them.

Seagrave v. Dean

908 So. 2d 41 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 10, 2005

A plaintiff is first required to establish a prima facie case by showing that he: (1) is a member of a protected class; [5] (2) was qualified for the position; (3) was terminated; and (4) was replaced by someone outside the … The jury was clearly wrong in finding otherwise.

Gasway v. Cellxion, Inc.

31 So. 3d 566 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 2010

As stated above, the WCJ found that Gasway established his inability to earn 90% of his pre-accident wages. … Gasway clearly established his inability to earn 90% of his pre-accident wages.

Parent-Community Alliance v. Orleans Parish Sch. Bd.

385 So. 2d 33 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1980

However, the evidence clearly discloses this letter was the action of Dr. Spears alone, and did not represent the consensus or vote, formal or informal, of the Board. Dr. … Two obviously qualified consultants were engaged and extensive publication was made nationwide in an effort to obtain the best qualified person for the job.

Jackson v. Town of Grambling

690 So. 2d 942 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 26, 1997

Allocation of Fault Jones and his Parents argue that the trial court's allocation of fault to Jones is clearly wrong. … The Louisiana Supreme Court, in discussing the last sentence of art. 2324(B), stated that it "establishes the rule that liability for damages caused by two or more persons is joint liability, rather than solidary liability

Jobe v. Hodge

207 So. 2d 912 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 5, 1968

As such it is immune from suit and from liability except with the consent of the Legislature. … These statutory limitations clearly must be read into the consent to sue a public body that may be granted by the Legislature.

State v. Foster

10 La.App. 3 Cir. 871 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 16, 2011

Clearly, his experience was sufficient to qualify him as an expert. Defendant argues the record does not contain written reasons for his adjudication in violation of La.R.S. 15:529.1(D)(3). … The evidence established that Defendant is a seven-time felony offender. 1 .RULING Defendant’s adjudication as a fourth felony offender is affirmed. AFFIRMED. 1 .

Wiley v. Karam

421 So. 2d 294 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 12, 1982

The trial court ruled that the plaintiffs-appellants failed to establish a breach of duty (negligence) by a preponderance of the evidence and dismissed their claims. This devolutive appeal followed. I. … In view of the evidence of record, this determination by the trial judge was not clearly wrong. Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978); Deason v.

Simon v. Variety Wholesalers, Inc.

788 So. 2d 544 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 11, 2001

Kramer, establishing her reasonable cause to believe the three men were working together to steal an item from the store." … Only then must the non-moving party "submit evidence showing the existence of specific facts establishing a genuine issue of material fact." Scott v.

Castille v. Leesville Lumber Co.

93 La.App. 3 Cir. 1091 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 1994

For these reasons, they argue that claimant is not legally qualified to receive workers compensation benefits under LSA-R.S. 23:1031A. Set forth in inverse order, these provisions read as follows: § 1031. … Accordingly, the hearing officer's factual findings were not clearly wrong, and her legal conclusions, premised on those findings, constitute accurate applications of the law.

Kathleen Edigo and David Edigo v. Otis Elevator Company

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 6, 2019

The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer finding it immune in tort. … The Babineux court clearly distinguished these facts from cases dealing with a defect in the premises as opposed to a parking lot case. 5

Veron v. Veron

657 So. 2d 156 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 3, 1995

Vicknair, 237 La. 1032 , 112 So.2d 702 (1959), the wife having the burden of establishing her necessitous circumstances. Malone v. Malone, 260 La. 759 , 257 So.2d 397 (1972). … The facts clearly show that Mrs. Veron is qualified physically and vocationally to earn a living as an elementary school teacher. Her teaching certificate qualifies her to teach grades one through eight. Although Mrs.

Latiolais v. Tauzin

477 So. 2d 1292 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 7, 1985

No discussion of the law is required to establish that this is simply not so. … In that regard plaintiff must show that the trial court was manifestly erroneous, that he was clearly wrong. We find no error in the trial court’s finding of fact.

Murphy v. Brookshire Grocery Co.

2002 La.App. 3 Cir. 0808 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 2002

It is understandable that Murphy perceived that a whiplash would not qualify as the type of injury that the attorney was asking her about. … We do not find that the workers' compensation judge was clearly wrong in finding that Murphy's answers were not willful, but probably more in the line of a misunderstanding as to whether whiplash would qualify as an injury

State v. Boothe

532 So. 2d 203 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 5, 1988

The third is the admission or acknowledgment of facts which tend to establish guilt, but which do not involve the existence of criminal intent. … "[A] blanket prohibition against the taking of voluntary statements or a permanent immunity from further interrogation, regardless of the circumstances, would transform the Miranda safeguards into wholly irrational obstacles

Toups v. Wolfson

2015 La.App. 4 Cir. 1037 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 29, 2015

Wolfson countered that the evidence clearly established that he maintained a full-time medical practice with the PPSO. … the trial court; and the appellate court must further determine that the record establishes that the finding is clearly wrong.

Valet v. City of Hammond

577 So. 2d 155 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 1991

This is a well settled rule and was first established in Harvey v. Travelers Insurance Company, 163 So.2d 915 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1964). See, Recard v. … However, this is an operational decision, not a policy-making or discretionary function decision for which La.R.S. 9:2798.1 provides immunity.

Smith v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co.

385 So. 2d 858 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 5, 1980

Clearly, the abutment was not an unreasonably dangerous condition. We find, as did the trial court, that the real cause of Mrs. Smith's injuries was her own failure to look where she was going and to walk carefully. … Hebert was simply unable to demonstrate sufficient training or experience in the field for which he sought to qualify as an expert. For the foregoing reasons, the trial court judgment is affirmed.

State v. Lambert

514 So. 2d 550 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 1, 1987

It was clearly established that apomorphine is an *553 isoquinoline alkaloid of opium. … This seems to be clearly contradictory to the doctrine that “nothing is a crime which is not clearly and unmistakably made a crime.” State v. Truby, supra.