Case law

Donald E. O'brien v. Dr. Akbar Rizvi

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 9, 2004

The burden is on a defendant to prove prematurity and initial immunity from suit as a qualified health care provider under the Medical Malpractice Act. … Subsection E of this section provides, in part, that: (1) Financial responsibility of a health care provider under this Section may be established only by filing with the board

Tommie Hebert, Et Ux. v. J. Oran Richard

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 17, 2015

Thus, Industrial must have produced factual support sufficient to establish that it would be able to meet its burden of proof at trial on this issue. … from tort. . . both the lending and borrowing employers are immune from suit in tort.”

State of Louisiana Versus Matthew F. Siekmann

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 5, 2025

R.S. 14:403.10 (B) establishes a three-prong test for determining whether the immunity it establishes applies. State v. Jago, 16-346 (La. … As such, the three-prong immunity test under La. R.S. 14:403.10(B) was not met.

Richard v. Dupuis

649 So. 2d 718 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 23, 1994

The opinions of expert witnesses who are members of the medical profession and who are qualified to testify on the subject are necessary to determine whether or not physicians possess the requisite degree of knowledge or … Moreover, the record clearly establishes that the jury not only relied on the testimony of Dr. Dupuis but on that of other witnesses, as discussed above. Therefore, we find no merit to this argument.

Smith v. Roussel

809 So. 2d 159 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 22, 2001

Allstate does not contest on appeal that Smith's injuries qualified as an occurrence under the policy. … Marie Smith says she explained clearly her need for a gentle, docile animal for her and her grandchildren to ride.

State v. Jackson

2015 La.App. 4 Cir. 0222 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 16, 2016

He also argues that L.A.’s 911 statements do not qualify as non-hearsay under La. C.E. art. 801(D)(1)(d) as the initial complaint of sexually assaultive behavior. … Her testimony established that the • defendant committed the offenses of aggravated rape and sexual battery as defined by La.

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

99 La.App. 4 Cir. 2754 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 2001

The two-part test for the appellate review of a factual finding is: (1) whether there is a reasonable factual basis in the record for the finding of the trial court, and (2) whether the record further establishes that the … In this case, because Trooper Ogle was not qualified as an expert in accident reconstruction, the trial court expressly *509 discounted his testimony as to how and where the impact occurred.

State v. Piazza

94 La.App. 1 Cir. 1841 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 5, 1995

Thus defendant failed to establish that the fish seized by the Department were acquired by him from Louisiana domestic fish farms. … Defendant failed to establish where he obtained the fish seized by the Department. The evidence is, therefore, clearly sufficient to support the conviction. Hence, defendant’s assignments of error lack merit.

Kevin Cavell v. Kevin Patrick Johnson, Jr.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 4, 2026

Johnson”), also qualified as a candidate for Oakdale Chief of Police on the same date. When qualifying ended on February 13, 2026, Mr. Cavell and Mr. Johnson were the only candidates to qualify. … Cavell introduced a copy of the statute creating the position of Deputy Chief to argue that the position is clearly in the classified service, indicating that it is a “classified competitive position.” Mr.

State v. Webb

2013 La.App. 4 Cir. 0146 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2014

Gina Pineda was qualified by the court as an expert in the field of molecular biology and DNA analysis. … Pineda testified that she has been qualified as an expert in twenty-six states, Canada and Australia.

Trichel Contracting Co. v. Roland

127 So. 2d 214 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 1961

This opinion, however, is qualified by the possibility that all of the cement might have gone into underground formations.” … A careful review of these three cases shows that they clearly represent the principles of law that if a person sues for the expense of an extra well alleging that he was furnished defective material, he clearly must sustain

John Doe v. Dynamic Physical Therapy, LLC and Scott Newton

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 2024

It is an 6 immunity statute. … Moreover, the conclusory allegations in the petition do not contain specific facts sufficient to establish that the defendants consciously desired the physical result of their acts or knew that the result was substantially

Harrison v. State, Dept. of Pub. Safety, Driv. Lic. Div.

298 So. 2d 312 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 4, 1974

Clearly this order is invalid because plaintiff was not notified or given the opportunity to be heard prior to the administrator's action. … But to successfully urge a denial of procedural due process, the complainant must establish an actual deprivation of a right. She Smith v. Department of Public Safety, 254 So.2d 515 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1971).

Carter v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1310 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 19, 2010

The plaintiff must first establish by |4a preponderance of the evidence that the doctor’s treatment fell below the ordinary standard of care expected of physicians in his medical specialty, and must then establish a causal … When the alleged negligence of a specialist is at issue, only those qualified in that specialty may offer expert testimony and evidence of the applicable standard of care. Fox v.

Joe Oliver v. Magnolia Clinic

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 17, 2010

In their petition, they specifically alleged the MMA: (1) Establishes an inadequate remedy in violation of Taylor’s right under Art. … This burden, as was clearly set forth in Sibley, rests with the State.

Whetstone v. Jefferson Parish School Board

12 La.App. 5 Cir. 639 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 30, 2013

injury or illness shall be compensable under either Subparagraph (b) or (c) unless the mental injury or illness is diagnosed by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist and the diagnosis of the condition meets the criteria as established … Bianchini, neuropsychologist, administered several psychiatric tests to claimant, ultimately reporting that claimant did not have disabling psychological problems *571 and was capable of returning to any job for which she was qualified

Watson v. McEacharn

99 So. 2d 138 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1957

In the alternative, it is contended if their son should be found to have been negligent then that the evidence establishes that Stanley D. McEacharn, Jr., had the last clear chance to avoid the accident. … For the same reasons assigned in the Jackson case, the doctrine of discovered peril clearly has application in the instant case.

XXI Oil & Gas, LLC v. Hilcorp Energy Co.

13 La.App. 3 Cir. 410 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 2013

“The statute clearly connects the costs reported to the benefits received in exchange. … Regardless of whether Hilcorp’s statement substantially supplied adequate information, the statute makes clear, without any additional qualifying or modifying language, that the statement must be sworn.

Dugas v. Bayou Teche Water Works, Inc.

13 La.App. 3 Cir. 890 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 12, 2014

On remand, the defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, supplementing the record regarding the question of whether it qualified as an entity offered the prescriptive limit of La.R.S. 9:5624. … Bayou Teche also attached deposition testimony and bills of sale associated with the plaintiffs’ property in an attempt to establish that the plaintiffs failed to file suit within two years of the damages being sustained.

Kirby v. Field

923 So. 2d 131 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 23, 2005

Kirby's invitation to establish a new "foreign body" exception to the prescriptive periods of La. R.S. 9:5628. … Allegations deficient in the factual particularity required to establish a cause of action are not "well-pleaded."