Case law

Duplantier v. Krewe of Pygmalion

2007 La.App. 4 Cir. 1034 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 3, 2008

“[A] ‘compensated employee of such krewe or organization’ is excepted from this statutory immunity even if he would otherwise qualify.” Daniel v. … As the moving party on the motion for summary judgment, Pygmalion bore the burden to prove that the Duplantiers would not be able to establish vicarious liability. Mr.

Banks v. Parish of Jefferson

12 La.App. 5 Cir. 215 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2013

R.S. 9:2798.1, to-wit: The Louisiana Supreme Court established a two-step test for courts to follow when determining whether the immunity applies. See Simeon v. Doe, 618 So.2d 848, 852-53 (La.1993). … Once a defendant establishes its conduct involves a matter of choice or discretion that is not the end of the inquiry.

Tristar Construction Co. v. Housing Authority

2001 La.App. 4 Cir. 2282 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 2002

Plaintiffs reasoning for claiming statutory immunity is misguided. … Clearly, the contract between the plaintiff and HANO was a performance specification contract and is therefore not entitled to statutory immunity pursuant to La. R.S. 9:2771. Plaintiffs argument is without merit.

Miller v. Southern Baptist Hosp.

806 So. 2d 10 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 2001

However, in summary, the record clearly shows that in addition to the host of side effects caused by the Interferon treatment, Mrs. … Graham clearly states that the sole issue at trial after the $100,000 payment is damages, not liability.

Daniel Harris v. Boh Bros. Construction Co., LLC and Abc Insurance Company

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 16, 2025

Thus, there is no need to discuss that issue as clearly the government approved the specifications.” … Bell’s methodology meets Daubert standards for reliability as he established the baseline of mobility for blind individuals and utilized Mr.

Hardy v. Bowie

719 So. 2d 1158 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 7, 1998

In the case sub judice, a factual inquiry is necessary to determine whether the police officers established a personal relationship to Hardy, precluding immunity under this exception to the public duty doctrine, or whether … In addition to the material immunity issues, the factual inquiry required to determine the officers' duty, as mentioned earlier in this decision, readily combines to clearly preclude any summary ruling by this or the lower

Lemaire v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.

793 So. 2d 336 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 22, 2001

CIBA-GEIGY further argues that the evidence clearly established that Lemaire's work was an integral and essential part of CIBA-GEIGY's business of producing chemicals, thus entitling CIBA-GEIGY to tort immunity. … that the finding is clearly wrong.

Devane v. Board of Commissioners

420 So. 2d 1001 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 7, 1982

Krauss Company, 217 So.2d 789, 791 (La.App. 4th Cir., 1969) and has clearly held that a contract of lease may establish a contractual relationship which makes the lessor a principal (statutory employer) within the meaning … Hence, the Port of New Orleans is a principal (statutory employer) and is immune from the third party tort claims of Devane, its statutory employee.

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.

State v. Foster

2002 La.App. 1 Cir. 1259 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 14, 2003

While the state introduced various documents at the healing, it did not offer any testimony or affidavits to establish that the state did not gain any prosecutorial advantage from the immunized testimony. … In Kastigar , the United States Supreme Court established a mechanism for insuring that the state does not make direct or indirect use of compelled testimony.

Pemella Williams v. the Board of Supervisors, of the Louisiana Community & Technical College Systems

Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 15, 2019

rules that were clearly established at the time the action was taken.” … “First, the court must determine whether the law was clearly established at the time the action occurred.

Noyel v. City of St. Gabriel

2015 La.App. 1 Cir. 1890 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 1, 2016

Noyel opposed the motion and filed a motion to strike the defendants’ affirmative defense of immunity on the basis that the defendants failed to urge immunity as a defense in their answer. … Gabriel Police Department’s employees, who arrested and transported Noyel to jail, were clearly engaged in activities which constitute “civil defense,” and thus, according to the Act, are also known as “emergency preparedness

State v. Lambert

93 So. 3d 771 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 2012

To follow the defendant’s reading of the law would be to allow any qualified officer, without regard to what that officer was doing, to violate the provisions of 14:95(E) with complete immunity. … In this case, the defendant clearly abused his position as custodian of the Assumption Parish Sheriffs Office evidence vault.

State v. Newton

12 La.App. 3 Cir. 509 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 13, 2013

Defendant argues in brief that “[t]he fact that Joshua Lambert exculpated Sean Newton in a police interview with Officer Chatham [sic] is clearly a Brady violation. … Defendant asserts that Watson “clearly believed that he would receive immunity in exchange for his testimony.”

Binkley v. Landry

2000 La.App. 1 Cir. 1710 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 28, 2001

immunity provided to public entities in Louisiana Revised Statute 9:2798.1. … Act No. 1264 of 1999 clearly added an additional exception to the grant of immunity for loss or damage sustained in a Mardi Gras parade.

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.

Ortego v. Landry

98 La.App. 3 Cir. 1948 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 11, 1999

“The affirmative defense of qualified immunity from suit is available to all governmental officials in § 1983 actions,” and “[t]he governmental official has the burden of proving the defense of qualified immunity.” La. … “The standard applicable in determining whether qualified immunity should be recognized is ‘objective reasonableness.’ ” Breaux v.

O'QUINN v. Power House Services, Inc.

633 So. 2d 707 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 1993

The evidence presented in support of the motion for summary judgment as to the character of this property establishes only that the property may encompass approximately 500 acres. … Because there remains a material issue of fact as to whether the nature of this property qualifies it for immunity under the recreational use statutes, summary judgment is not appropriate.

Bozeman v. Reed

633 So. 2d 944 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 11, 1994

that the finding is clearly wrong (manifestly erroneous). … We find that the record supports an assessment of 50 percent fault on the part of Reed. [11] DPS'S IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER THREE In this assignment of error, DPS contends that it is immune from

Stokes v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company

232 So. 2d 328 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 12, 1970

Immunities presently enjoyed would be eliminated. … This could amount to a considerable economic factor. *341 Under the circumstances we cannot conclude defendants were unreasonable in relying on a well established rule which clothed them with immunity from the claim presently