Case law

Boyd v. Boyd

647 So. 2d 414 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 7, 1994

Boyd presented the testimony of Dianne Phillips, a licensed professional counselor who was qualified as an expert in family counseling. … NOTES [1] The record in this proceeding does not clearly establish the dates pertaining to the criminal charges. [2] A negative inference may be drawn against a party to a civil case who asserts his Fifth Amendment privileges

Duhon v. Slickline, Inc.

449 So. 2d 1147 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 11, 1984

Concerning the loss of tools caused by the inexperienced employee, the plaintiff stated that he felt the employee, who had worked for Slickline, Inc. for six months, should have been qualified to perform the task assigned … Kim Duhon, the record owner of one-third of the corporate stock, has pre-emptive rights established by Article XXI which would be clearly violated by such an order.

DiMattia v. Gulf South Beverage, Inc.

459 So. 2d 598 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 13, 1984

LaRocca, qualified as an expert in orthopedic surgery testified it was his opinion that the accident of March 5, 1981 caused the pain, suffering, resulting surgical operations, and disability to DiMattia.” … It is inescapable that the only physician who testified in regard to the surgeries unequivocally established the March 5, 1981 accident as the cause of the plaintiffs surgeries.

State v. Johnson

175 So. 3d 442 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 12, 2015

When the direct evidence is thus viewed, the facts established by the direct evidence and inferred from the circumstances established by that evidence must be sufficient for a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable … Clearly, the evidence at trial satisfied all of the elements required to prove the crime of aggravated kidnapping.

Touchet v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York

264 So. 2d 752 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 5, 1972

When we add to this the testimony of plaintiff, his co-employees, Bertrand and Stutes, and his son-in-law, Williams, which taken together clearly establishes an accident and plaintiff's continuing disability as a result thereof … We agree that that statement does not clearly express our views.

Coats v. Lee

70 So. 2d 229 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 26, 1954

Coats has appealed from the ruling assigning prejudicial error by the judge a quo in excluding evidence tendered by him to establish the prescription of thirty years under Articles 3475 and 3499, as qualified by Articles … But clearly if plaintiff through Mrs.

Levy v. BAYOU INDUS. MAINTENANCE SERVICES

855 So. 2d 968 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 26, 2003

Rice's report were based solely on the figures and circumstances established by Mr. Levy. Dr. … Moreover, on review of the record, the award clearly was based on multiple factors, and was not contingent on merely plaintiff's ability or inability to become a licensed professional counselor.

Succession of Spyker

159 So. 347 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 18, 1935

be technically, as to these plaintiffs, res judicata, which excludes all proof to. the contrary, yet they constitute, especially at this distance of time, prima fa-cie proof, which imposes upon' plaintiffs the burden of establishing … However, a reference to the foregoing quotations will show it to be clearly established that a judgment homologating a provisional account and partial tableau of distribution constitutes res adjudicata as to the claims appearing

Houghton v. Our Lady of the Lake Hosp., Inc.

859 So. 2d 103 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 16, 2003

No civil action against a qualified health care provider or its insurer may be commenced in any court before the claimant's proposed complaint has been presented to a medical review panel established pursuant to the Act. … The panel was not established pursuant to the provisions of the Act, which clearly requires advance written notice to the parties of any employment relationship, financial relationship, or other relationship with either party

State v. Hill

601 So. 2d 684 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 13, 1992

The defense presented no other testimony to establish its position. … The trial court failed to allow Barnes the latitude to fully develop the extent of the leniency/immunity deal between the state and his accuser and failed to require production of previous exculpatory and bias-reflecting

State v. Green

437 So. 2d 302 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 15, 1983

Art. 851, contending that the jury verdict was clearly contrary to the law and the evidence. He maintains the evidence does not show he was knowingly and intentionally in possession of the preludin. … The record establishes beyond doubt that the defendant is an habitual criminal.

Roark v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.

415 So. 2d 295 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 10, 1982

Pankey, a highly qualified expert in the field of infectious diseases, was also introduced into evidence. Dr. … The record in this case clearly indicates that in the ordinary course of affairs, a certain number of hospital patients will contract a staph infection regardless of the conduct of the hospital.

Hampton v. Greenfield

576 So. 2d 630 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 14, 1991

Liability of the State Uncontradicted expert testimony at the trial clearly established that Charity's policy allowing SRNA Reyes to respond to this code call was a breach of the applicable standard of care, as the trial … We agree with plaintiff that the trial judge's conclusion as to causation is based upon improper legal analysis and is clearly wrong.

Forstall v. Daigrepont

551 So. 2d 653 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 28, 1989

Clearly, this issue was a matter of fact solely within the province of the jury. … Clearly, an award of $10,000 to plaintiff for his injuries was one that reasonable men could reach.

Knecht v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

408 So. 2d 1147 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 11, 1981

Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978), the trial judge’s factual findings are not disturbed on appellate review unless the record establishes that they are clearly wrong. … Our review of the entire record indicates that the trial court was not clearly wrong in its findings.

State v. Anderson

842 So. 2d 1222 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 9, 2003

When the direct evidence is thus viewed, the facts established by the direct evidence and inferred from the circumstances established by that evidence must be sufficient for a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable … Clearly, the abilities which he possessed not only qualified him for a GED program, but allowed him to perform satisfactorily in a work environment.

In re the Tutorship of Watts

96 La.App. 1 Cir. 0073 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1996

Louisiana Civil Code article 248 provides in pertinent part: “[t]utorship by nature takes place of right, but the natural tutor must qualify for the office as provided by law.” … Watts, as surviving parent, is the natural tutor of his minor children and is entitled to be confirmed and qualified as such as a matter of right under La.C.C. art. 250.

White v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.

416 So. 2d 327 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 1982

Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330, 1333 (La.1978), "manifestly erroneous" means "clearly wrong." … We cannot find that the trial court was clearly wrong in the categorization. We, too, conclude that Mr. White has established a prima facie case for oddlot categorization.

Guy T. Williams Realty, Inc. v. Shamrock Const.

564 So. 2d 689 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 6, 1990

He was also qualified as an expert in construction. He inspected the building in November of 1982. … The evidence establishes that Shamrock paid for corrective work to a sewerage line which was outside of the original contract.

Pelican Homestead & Savings Ass'n v. Campbell

588 So. 2d 179 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1991

Bank v.L&W Farms, 496 So.2d 1268 (La.App.3rd Cir. 1986), writ denied, 499 So.2d 87 (La.1987) the court correctly noted at 1271-1272: It is well established, under both federal common law and statutory provisions, that oral … In Hatmaker , the court found that Section 1823(e) clearly covers a defense based on an oral promise by the bank to make future loans to the borrower which the bank does not intend to perform.