Case law

Populis v. State, Department of Transportation & Development

16 La.App. 5 Cir. 655 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 31, 2017

Bd., 06-1223 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1/30/08) ; 975 So.2d 698, 709-10 , stated, the following regarding the application of discretionary immunity: *981 The Louisiana Supreme .Court established a two-step test for courts to follow … that the finding is clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.

Rosen v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development

2001 La.App. 4 Cir. 0499 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2002

If the employee had no discretion or choice as to appropriate conduct, there is no immunity. … This conclusion is not manifestly erroneous, clearly wrong, or wrong as a matter of law.

Dupre & Son Floor Covering, Inc. v. City of Iota

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1183 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 5, 2010

Therefore, Iota contended, the officers and town were immune pursuant to La. … We need not determine that Iota is immune and that Iota negated one or more of the essential elements of tort; for Iota to prevail, we need only find that it is immune or that the essential elements of tort have been negated

Dauzat v. Dolgencorp, LLC

15 La.App. 3 Cir. 1096 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 2016

that the finding is clearly wrong (manifestly erroneous). … [T]he effect of the assertion of the conditional or qualified privilege is to rebut the plaintiffs allegations of fault and shift the burden to plaintiff to establish abuse of the privilege. Smith [v.

Zamanian v. Christian Health Ministry

715 So. 2d 57 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 20, 1998

The assertion of qualified immunity constitutes a rebuttal of the allegation of malice and places the burden on the plaintiff/physician to establish malice or lack of good faith. Boyd v. … The qualified immunity of La. R.S. 13:3715.3(C) rebuts the plaintiff's allegations of malice and places the burden on the plaintiff/physician to establish malice or lack of good faith. Smith, 639 So.2d 730 . Under La.

TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LOUISIANA v. Blalock

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 459 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 4, 2009

It asserted that the trial court “should establish the boundary line between the lands owned by Intervenor and the land owned by the Tunica Biloxi Indians of Louisiana.” … It is well established that Indian tribes possess sovereign immunity from suit that existed at common law. Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. A & P Steel, Inc., 874 F.2d 550, 552 (8th Cir.1989). The Tribe may waive this immunity.

Meyer & Associates, Inc. v. Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana

6 La.App. 3 Cir. 1542 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 8, 2007

Cous-hatta refutes the import of Meyer’s arguments with evidence establishing that nonmembers doing business with the Tribe regularly obtained specific resolutions waiving sovereign immunity as provided in the Judicial Code … Nat’l Farmers, 471 U.S. 845 , 105 S.Ct. 2447 , 85 L.Ed.2d 818 . 11SConclusions Louisiana and its courts clearly have an interest in seeing that their citizens are protected when they contract with Indian tribes.

Bulot v. Justice

552 So. 2d 1344 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 15, 1989

LSA-R.S. 42:1441.2(A) clearly provides the clerk of a district court is a public officer "named in and designated as parish officials by Article VI, Sections 5(G) [3] and 7(B) [4] of the Constitution ..." … NOTES [1] Article 12, Section 10 of the 1974 Constitution provides as follows: "(A) No Immunity in Contract and Tort.

Chretien v. FW Woolworth Company

160 So. 2d 854 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 1964

The contention is that the provisions of LSA-R.S. 15:84.5 clothed the storekeeper with a qualified privilege affording immunity from a civil action for damages. … The store manager may have had a perfect right to question plaintiff whom he suspected of shoplifting, but the rights and qualified privilege granted by the statute do not clothe the storekeeper with immunity when its manager

Lebleu v. Southern Silica of Louisiana

554 So. 2d 852 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1989

Our jurisprudence clearly establishes that the source of contribution is subrogation. Thompson v. Cane Garden Apt., 480 So.2d 373 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1985); Sellers v. … health providers (like the doctor in Ferguson ) who are solidarily liable with at least one qualified health care provider.

Pierce v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York

205 So. 2d 831 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1967

The Hamilton decision clearly disposes of defendant's contention that the 1960 amendment to Article 3, Section 35 did not intend to "waive the traditional immunity of the municipality in connection with the performance of … Defendant avers that certain acts passed in 1960 and 1966 clearly illustrate that specific legislative authority waiving both immunity from suit and liability is necessary in order to file suit against the state or any of

Seaman v. Howard

2002 La.App. 3 Cir. 0855 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2002

its entirety, we must find that a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the trial court’s finding and that the record establishes that the finding is clearly wrong. 2 DPSC’s Duty to Test for HIV and to Inform The trial … When a sexual offender is convicted, the court shall order and direct the offender to submit to a blood and saliva test, to be made by qualified physicians or other qualified persons, under such restrictions Land direction

Banks v. Parish of Jefferson

990 So. 2d 26 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 2008

The act establishes local and regional offices of emergency preparedness. La.R.S. 29:729. … "Clearly, [the parish] was provided with immunity from negligence in its efforts to remedy the effects of Hurricane Lili during the state of emergency absent a showing of willful misconduct. (citing Castille v.

Schmit v. Tjitandi

2016 La.App. 1 Cir. 1431 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 2, 2017

Schmit entitled to tort immunity under the LWCA. … In the case at bar, the uncontested evidence admitted for purposes of the motions for summary judgment establishes that Mr. Tjitandi was first hired by Qualified in April or May of 2013.

Aucoin v. Rochel

2008 La.App. 1 Cir. 1180 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 23, 2008

Aucoin relies on dicta by the Louisiana Supreme Court in a footnote in a case that involved an intoxicated minor clearly outside the scope of immunity provided by the statute. In Berg v. … In this case, the facts are even stronger in establishing that Ms.

Campo v. Sternberger

15 La.App. 5 Cir. 52 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 2015

Experience alone is. normally sufficient to qualify a witness as an expert. Cheairs, supra. … Anderson, testified clearly that he saw no deficiency in the plans and specifications provided by J.E. Bruce Design Consultants or Lee Engineers.

Holder v. Louisiana Parks Service

552 So. 2d 20 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 8, 1989

Louisiana Parks Service, Inc., 493 So.2d 275 (La.App. 3 Cir.1986), held that "[t]here remains a material issue as to whether the park, its location and surrounding developments qualifies it for the immunity provided for by … The affidavit of Nancy Reed clearly shows that the Park was not a commercial profit making enterprise.

Marie v. Police Jury of Parish of Terrebonne

161 So. 2d 407 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 2, 1964

"The jurisprudence of this State is well established that a police jury, as a political subdivision of the State, falls within the scope of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. … clearly alleged acts that constitute a taking of property, viz: "`2.

Mitter v. St. John the Baptist Parish

920 So. 2d 263 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 2005

It is well established, however, that where it is attempted to establish an exception to a general rule, strict construction is required and the exception is not to be recognized unless it is clearly established. … In my opinion, the exception in question here is not clearly established and, thus, this *270 Court should not recognize that exception.

Gillan v. Jones

157 So. 2d 598 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 20, 1964

The above emphatic rejection of participation in a survey of the property clearly supports the contentions of the Gillan family. … We are impressed by the declaration of counsel for defendants-appellants with reference to one of their asserted specifications of error: "* * * the evidence in this record clearly establishes that the Island Chute has never