Case law

Ulmer v. Baton Rouge General Hospital

361 So. 2d 1238 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 12, 1978

David Aiken, a physician and surgeon, who qualified as an expert on behalf of plaintiff and who testified on direct and on rebuttal. In substance, Dr. … We have considered the awards made in the instant case in light of the well-established rule and find no abuse of the much discretion vested in the jury.

Byrd v. Pulmonary Care Specialists, Inc.

2016 La.App. 1 Cir. 0485 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 2016

Thereafter, if the adverse party fails to produce factual support sufficient to establish that he will be able to satisfy his evidentiary burden of proof at trial, there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the mover … However, we decline consideration of this argument since there is no indication in the record that PCS is a qualified health care provider entitled to the limited liability protection of the Louisiana Medical Malpractice

Brown v. Adams

9 So. 2d 699 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 1942

This requirement simply tracks the well established jurisprudence of the state as discussed in Beard v. Henry, supra, and cases therein cited. … The answer to this contention is to simply say that the statute clearly authorizes the procedure. A contest of this sort must be filed within two days after the committee has acted.

State v. Converse

529 So. 2d 459 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 1988

Defendant complains that Deputy Daigle was allowed to offer opinion evidence to the effect that the piece of wire could be used in a dangerous manner, (despite the fact that he was not qualified as an expert witness). … His testimony was clearly based upon his personal observations. This assignment of error has no merit.

Professional Dental Health Network, Inc. v. Advantage Health Plan, Inc.

0 La.App. 5 Cir. 1399 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2001

In the Hearing Agreement Section 2 is titled, “Use of the PDHN Dental Network” (emphasis added) although clearly it should have been called “Use of the PDHN Hearing Network.” … AHP argues that the two varying interpretations of that Paragraph establish its ambiguity.

Norred v. Travelers Insurance Company

236 So. 2d 637 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 26, 1970

One of these physicians is an internist, specially qualified to treat a metabolic condition such as diabetes. … The testimony clearly establishes that the infection in Norred's hand was healed and his diabetic condition was under complete control on his release from the hospital on December 2, 1965.

State v. Hicks

607 So. 2d 937 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 28, 1992

establish the identity of the victim. … McCormick was qualified as an expert in forensic pathology and a physician. The record reflects that his testimony was in compliance with LSA-C.E. Arts. 702 and 705(B).

State, Department of Social Services, Office of Family Support v. Gibson

768 So. 2d 714 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 2000

The affidavit shall state in substance: (a) That the affiant is qualified as an examiner of blood or tissue samples for inherited characteristics, including but not limited to blood and tissue types, to administer the test … Sozer’s report clearly indicates that Mr. Gibson’s failure to exhibit this fragment was taken into consideration when the final probability of paternity and combined paternity index were calculated.

Louisiana Power and Light Co. v. City of Houma

229 So. 2d 202 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1969

It is either established or conceded that defendant services 290 customers outside its municipal limits. … This latter determination is made in view of what we consider the clearly implied mandate in Ouachita that recriminatory expropriations are to be avoided as a matter of law.

State v. Morgan

2002 La.App. 4 Cir. 1489 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 12, 2003

The question here is whether this decision was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. … It is patent that the state court’s determination of this issue was not contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law, but in fact follows it. Thus, plaintiffs claim of cruel and unusual punishment fails.

Carter v. Spears

248 So. 2d 859 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 25, 1971

(John) Mozeke, plaintiffs’ grandfather, had been duly appointed and qualified as tutor of the minors, Booker T. Carter and James D. … This allegation is not correct as the record clearly shows that Mattie Jean Mozeke Spears was duly appointed tutrix for Willie Mae Nelson (Probate Docket 955) and was authorized to sell the minor’s interest in the property

Ortega v. Recreation & Parks Comm'n for the Parish of E. Baton Rouge

255 So. 3d 6 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 18, 2018

summary, it [was] the Court's opinion that BREC's actions, based on the facts of this case, are reasonable and substantive relations to the health safety and general welfare of the public and [its] employees, and they [were] clearly … This general right was expressly qualified. The legislature is clearly empowered to fashion exceptions in cases established by law that are in the public interest. See Id. at 387.

Johnson v. Crum

2 La.App. 5 Cir. 930 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 10, 2002

Crum was indeed a resident of the 40th Judicial District within the last two years and is therefore qualified. … We are unable to say that those findings were clearly wrong, based as they were on a reasonable view of the evidence and determinations of credibility.

State v. Baker

582 So. 2d 1320 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 30, 1991

The statements made by defendant to Detective Davis were clearly exculpatory in nature. … Alden and her statement to Williams was not established. Second, Mrs.

Andrew Richard Early, III v. The Unopened Succession of Lolalisa Clark

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 23, 2026

A party is indispensable only when the facts clearly establish that no complete and equitable adjudication of the controversy can be made in his absence. The burden of proving an exception is on the party asserting it. … limited purpose of any such action or proceeding, the appointed attorney at law shall be the proper representative of the succession of any such decedent to the same extent as if he were the regularly appointed and duly qualified

Sanders v. Sanders

923 So. 2d 721 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 23, 2005

STANDARD OF REVIEW The threshold issue is whether the 2004- “interim” decree qualified as a considered decree- of permanent custody, which would require application of the Ber-geron proof rule before a change could be made … No evidence was presented to establish a strong need for a separation of this brother and sister. Rather, the record supports a finding that the children are best served by remaining together and that Mr.

Soileau v. Med-Express Ambulance Service, Inc.

3 La.App. 3 Cir. 0351 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 1, 2003

“Some” expert testimony is necessary to establish this aspect of materiality because only a physician or other qualified expert is capable of judging that risk exists and the likelihood of occurrence. … [It must] review the record in its entirety to determine whether the trial court’s finding was clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.” Id. at 882 (citation omitted).

Office Center, Inc. v. Tanenbaum

225 So. 2d 740 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 31, 1969

During the course of the trial the defendants attempted to introduce parole testimony to establish that the motivating consideration for the agreement was the fact that the property formed the corner of Sandford Street and … It clearly described the property as lots 12, 13, and 14, of Square No. 31, Unit #2, Section A, Pontchartrain Garden Subdivision.

Albuquerque Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Deville

615 So. 2d 1002 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 1993

based on agreements not firmly established in the failed financial institution’s official records. … However, this statute clearly does not constitute an “agreement” subject to the application of D’Oench, Duhme and § 1823(e).

State v. Morehead

870 So. 2d 428 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 2, 2004

The state clearly established that the gun in question was the murder weapon. The salient portions of Clarissa's testimony was borne out by other evidence, particularly as to motive and time frame. … The trial court found the state had clearly established that the murder *441 had occurred in Ouachita Parish, and denied the defendant's motion.