Case law

Citron v. Gentilly Carnival Club, Inc.

2014 La.App. 4 Cir. 1096 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 15, 2015

As the movant, the Endymion Krewe had the initial burden of providing evidence to establish its right to immunity under the statute. … Kelly was not qualified as an expert in beads. .

Farber v. Bobear

2010 La.App. 4 Cir. 0985 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 19, 2011

Arceneaux argued that, as an employee of the LSBME, she is immune from liability for defamation under La.Rev.Stat. § 37:1287(A). We agree with Ms. … However, plaintiff was clearly reprimanded for “clinical mismanagement” and “inappropriate prescriptions of Lincocin.”

Lambert v. State

912 So. 2d 426 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 2005

Immunity Under the Recreational Use Statutes In determining whether a defendant is afforded immunity under the recreational use statutes, the Louisiana Supreme Court has established a three prong test. … It is an established principle that legislative grants of such rights, powers, privileges, immunities or benefits as against the general public, as distinguished from a right against some other party, should be construed

Walker v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

765 So. 2d 1224 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 25, 2000

The parent-child immunity Statute was enacted in 1960 as a revision of the similar immunity provided by former Article 104 of the Code of Practice of 1870. … Stated from the viewpoint of the parent, it is a privilege, but only a qualified one."

Ernest v. Petroleum Service Corp.

2002 La.App. 1 Cir. 2482 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 2003

The original bill was intended to clarify the judicially established standard for determining statutory employer/employee status by legislatively establishing guidelines for this determination. … Paragraph (3) clearly provides that the statutory employee relationship shall not exist unless there is a written contract.

Lewis v. Modular Quarters

508 So. 2d 975 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 1987

That evidence also establishes that Unifab was engaged in the work of sandblasting and painting at the time of plaintiff's accident and injury. … In such a case, Unifab clearly is not immune from a suit in tort by plaintiff under the provisions of the LHWCA.

Kieff v. Louisiana Land & Exploration Co.

99 La.App. 4 Cir. 2947 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 24, 2001

The plaintiff does not contend otherwise, preferring to focus his argument instead on his contention that the site of the accident was located in navigable waters and therefore not qualified for recreational use immunity. … We agree with the trial judge’s finding that: “Clearly a water control device meets this standard.”

Mullins v. State

378 So. 2d 503 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 6, 1979

Clearly the Office of Coroner cannot be within the Executive branch of our state government. *506 The Office of Parish Coroner is an elected office which was constitutionally created by Art. 5 § 29 of the Constitution of … Louisiana Architect Selection Board, 362 So.2d 498 (La.1978), the Supreme Court held that the State and its agencies are not immune from the payment of court costs. In Hopkins v.

Foshee v. LOUISIANA FARM BUREAU CAS. INS.

948 So. 2d 1171 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 2007

Foshee, we conclude that the plaintiff has not established factual *1178 support sufficient to establish his evidentiary burden at trial. … Clearly then, both parties agree that Mr. Bates' conduct was not "deliberate and wanton" as required by the statute. Nor is there evidence that his conduct constituted gross negligence.

Bates v. King

915 So. 2d 1037 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 2, 2005

Unlike the defendants in Cormier and Burton , the Kings have established them *1042 selves as restauranteurs. … On the record before us, we find that the Kings have clearly demonstrated that they were engaged in the normal course and scope of their employment with Pitt Grill at the time of Ms. Bates’ [¡¡injury.

Lakeisha Mills, Felicity Mitchell, Roberta Ross, Natasha Graves, Ashley Suez, Kaleen Moses, Kathy Barbay, Jennifer Gaffney, And Adlai Mack Stevenson II v. Dr. Leon R. Tarver II, in his individual and official capacity as Chairman of The Board of Supervisors of Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, The Board of Supervisors of Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2021

The doctrine of qualified immunity generally shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Once raised, a plaintiff has the burden to rebut the qualified immunity defense by establishing that the official' s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law. Collins v.

Oliver v. MAGNOLIA CLINIC

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 439 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 31, 2011

Additionally, in some cases, “a Plaintiffs right to recover damages at all is barred by legislative grants of immunity from suit.” See La. R.S. 9:2795. … This burden, as was clearly set forth in Sibley, rests with the State.

Penn v. St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office

2002 La.App. 1 Cir. 0893 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 2, 2003

Humphrey, supra , reasonableness of force, and qualified immunity. … Applying the analysis established in Heck and its progeny, if Mr.

Lakeisha Mills, Felicity Mitchell, Roberta Ross, Natasha Graves, Ashley Suez, Kaleen Moses, Kathy Barbay, Jennifer Gaffney, And Adlai Mack Stevenson II v. Dr. Leon R. Tarver II, in his individual and official capacity as Chairman of The Board of Supervisors of Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, The Board of Supervisors of Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2021

The doctrine of qualified immunity generally shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Once raised, a plaintiff has the burden to rebut the qualified immunity defense by establishing that the official' s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law. Collins v.

Encalade v. West Jefferson Medical Center Ambulance Service

9 La.App. 5 Cir. 355 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 24, 2009

The court finds that these cases are clearly distinguishable *1118 from the case at bar. … Encalade is not the kind of emergency medical care or medical duty that the legislature sought to immunize from liability under the LMMA.

Reppond v. City of Denham Springs

572 So. 2d 224 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 14, 1990

Louisiana Power Light Co., 435 U.S. 389 , 98 S.Ct. 1123 , 55 L.Ed.2d 364 (1978), the Supreme Court held that the "state action" immunity established in Parker v. … In Dukes this court concluded that neither the government, federal or state, nor any of its subdivisions, are included within the purview of a statute unless the legislative intent is clearly stated.

Irion v. State Ex Rel. DOTD

760 So. 2d 1220 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 12, 2000

is clearly wrong. … Moreover, I find that the record evidence clearly establishes that the sole legal cause of this accident was Mr. Irion's negligent operation of his vehicle.

Hebert v. CLARENDON AMERICAN INS. CO.

2007 La.App. 3 Cir. 0992 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 4, 2008

That being the case, we decline to ignore the established law and grant Ms. Hebert the relief she requests on this basis. Ms. … Thus, they did not qualify as "third persons" because they were not legally liable to pay the employee damages because of his work-related automobile accident.

Huang v. BD. OF TRUSTEES FOR STATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

781 So. 2d 1 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 2000

that the finding is clearly wrong (manifestly erroneous). … "To establish a prima facie case of discrimination in the context of a denial of tenure, the plaintiff must show that: (1) he belongs to a protected group, (2) he was qualified for tenure, and (3) he was denied tenure in

Addison v. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. of Wis.

64 So. 2d 484 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 19, 1953

The fallacy of plaintiff's argument is clearly shown by a decision of the Orleans Court of Appeal in the case of Mock v. … was personal and of which immunity the insurer could not take advantage.