Case law

Rogers v. Read

355 So. 2d 46 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 16, 1978

Judgment was rendered declaring the sale lesionary, establishing the market value at the date of sale as $24,000, giving defendant the election of either retaining title by paying the difference between the sale price and … Clearly, plaintiff is entitled to credit for these amounts in the event the defendant elects to return title to the property to plaintiff. The judgment of the district court is affirmed at appellant's cost. Affirmed.

Breeden v. Valencia, Inc.

557 So. 2d 302 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 16, 1990

As detailed above, plaintiff failed to establish that the steering mechanism of the ski was unreasonably dangerous and constituted a defect. … After reviewing the record, we cannot say that the trial court was clearly wrong.

Lewis v. St. Charles Parish Hospital District

323 So. 2d 842 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 9, 1975

Lewis has not sought employment in any of the various fields of endeavor that are clearly open to her. … Furthermore, we find that she is clearly entitled to reimbursement for those proven out-of-pocket medical expenses which our computation indicates amount to a total of $115.68.

LeBouef v. O'Donnell

12 La.App. 3 Cir. 514 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2012

LeBouef bore the burden of proof in establishing that prescription had not run when she joined Dr. O’Donnell to the litigation. Ms. LeBouefs pleadings establish that her claim against Dr. … It is well settled that a court of appeal may not set aside a trial court’s or a jury’s finding of fact in the absence of “manifest error” or unless it is “clearly wrong,” and where there is conflict in the testimony, reasonable

Kirshner v. Johnson

521 So. 2d 697 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 23, 1988

The facts indicate that there was a fence around this establishment, the fence had a lock on it. … This evidence established a prima facie case of liability against Johnson.

Hanna-Abington Alexandria, Inc. v. BUDD CONST. CO., INC.

487 So. 2d 743 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 23, 1986

Hixson, a witness for the plaintiff, qualified as an expert in construction engineering but not in soil analysis. … Under these cases, Article 2762 clearly applies to the construction of an asphalt parking lot. "In Worst [Wurst] v.

Chenevert v. Hilton

2007 La.App. 3 Cir. 1223 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 2008

Chenevert was qualified to receive social security disability payments from testifying to this fact." … that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity such officer shall not be held liable for any costs, including attorney's fees, unless such action was clearly

Irsch v. Argonaut Great Cent. Ins. Co.

841 So. 2d 831 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 28, 2003

Joseph Lafranca, a forensic engineer, was qualified as an expert in the field of construction. … A reviewing court may only disturb the lower court's holding upon a finding that the trier of fact was clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.

Succession of Jeanine S. Passafume Vs.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2024

Generally, appellate court’s review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard. Succession of Fanz, 2019-0503, p. 5 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1/29/20), 364 So.3d 119, 123 (quoting White v. … This Court explained that Louisiana statutory law establishes that the trial court has the authority to place legatees in possession of succession property upon the filing of petition for possession; after

Brandao v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

803 So. 2d 1039 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 2001

However, he felt that, before the accident, she was qualified for many office jobs, but that after the accident, the number of jobs she was qualified to perform had been significantly reduced. Dr. … The record establishes, however, that the Brandaos are a close and loving family. Mr.

Cannella v. Gulf Refining Co.

154 So. 406 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 23, 1934

It is true that Adrian had been exposed to practically the same conditions for many years without injury, hut it would not he unreasonable to conclude that his immunity was because of the state of his health and his ability … The court finally concluded that the evidence did not establish that arsenical poisoning was a disease incidental to the occupation in question and affirmed the award in favor of the plaintiff.

Tri-South Mortgage Investors v. Forest & Waterway Corp.

354 So. 2d 588 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 13, 1977

This suffices to preserve the rank of his claim, and render it immune to a plea of prescription predicated upon failure to file a notice of lis pendens.” … Clearly, Drennan obligated himself to furnish all tools and transportation necessary to perform the work.

Russo v. Kraus

2010 La.App. 4 Cir. 0178 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 29, 2010

[w]hen prescription is raised by peremptory exception, with evidence being introduced at the hearing on the exception, the trial court’s findings | sof fact on the issue of prescription are subject to the manifest error-clearly … Although we find that Kenyon was sufficient evidence for Arizona’s purposes to establish no insurance crisis existed in 1975, being the same time frame of when La.

State v. Clark

670 So. 2d 493 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 21, 1996

In an attack upon a legislative act as falling within an exception to the legislature's otherwise plenary power, an opponent must establish clearly and convincingly that the constitutional aim was to deny to the legislature … If the claimant qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis, no bond is required. La.R.S. 40:2612(E). Civil in personam proceedings are also authorized. La.R.S. 40:2613.

State v. Richey

13 La.App. 5 Cir. 228 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 30, 2013

fact was right or wrong, but whether the fact-finder’s conclusion was a reasonable one. 22 Thus, where two permissible views of the evidence exist, the fact-finder’s choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly … the value of the stolen property if it is clear and uncontradict-ed. 29 The owner does not need to be qualified as an expert in order to testify as to the value of the thing owned by him. 30 Theft is a crime of specific

Tony Berard, Et Ux. v. the Lemoine Company, LLC

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 8, 2015

Thus, the statutory employer doctrine through the two contract theory was established to protect the employee, not the principal. Yet, in the matter before us, Lemoine seeks statutory-employer status, not for Mr. … Exhibition Hall Authority, 02- 1072 (La. 4/9/03), 842 So.2d 373, wherein the court stated: A careful reading of the above statutes, especially the highlighted language, reveals that the Louisiana legislature clearly

Utley-James v. State, Div. of Admin.

593 So. 2d 1261 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 11, 1991

Change Order Number Four clearly provides that the contractor shall bear all costs of any damages, delays and/or additional costs that may have been incurred.... … The record establishes that this clause was not included in the final draft of Change Order Number Four and in fact was completely deleted from the final agreement.

State v. Morgan

673 So. 2d 256 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 17, 1996

The Court recognized sentence review as an established function of the judicial branch, citing State v. … The trial court clearly abused its discretion by sentencing the defendant below the minimum under LSA-R.S. 15:529.1." Hyorth, pg. 4-5, 661 So.2d at 1062. In State v.

Family Care Services, Inc. v. Owens

46 So. 3d 234 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 11, 2010

Dapremont, 844 So.2d 877 (4th Cir.2003) (plaintiff was clearly entitled to injunction with bond; however, the trial judge did not require security. … that during his/her employment by FAMILY CARE and for a period of two (2) years following the termination or resignation of such employment for any reason whatsoever, he/she shall not within the Area, set up, start up, establish

State v. Kelly

639 So. 2d 888 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 8, 1994

Deviation from the Guidelines was clearly justified. We determine that the defendant's sentence is not unconstitutionally excessive. This assignment has no merit. … Even where the evidence demonstrates a probability of guilt, yet, if it does not establish it beyond a reasonable doubt, you must acquit the accused.