Case law

Tallulah Const. v. Ne La Delta Development

982 So. 2d 225 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 23, 2008

Dew is a credible witness to establish the oral contract, and that sufficient corroborating evidence was presented to establish an agreement between Northeast and Tallulah. … Dew, although a party to the suit, qualifies as a credible witness for purposes of Article 1846. [19] Additionally, *233 we find that Tallulah demonstrated other corroborating evidence, pursuant to Article 1846, which established

Richard and Judith Williams v. United States Fire Insurance

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 5, 2022

The affidavits clearly in her, um, attached to her Motion establish that there was an emergency; there was notice. You all don’t dispute coverage. … It states clearly that it provides coverage for travel delay and Interruption, for medical expense arising from illness or injury, for transportation expenses incurred to evacuate you to the nearest qualified

Ansardi v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corp.

111 So. 3d 460 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 1, 2013

Citizens asserted, rather, that the one-year policy period was purely contractual, and, thus, immune from interruption or suspension. … C.C.P. art. 596 indicates that a plaintiff who successfully establishes that he was a putative member of the Buxton/Chalona classes had until November 30, 2009, to file a claim against Citizens. 19 Clearly, the Supreme Court

Husband v. Lafayette Ins. Co.

93 La.App. 5 Cir. 815 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 16, 1994

ANALYSIS It is well established that an insurance policy is the contract between the parties, and as such, must be interpreted in accordance with general principles of contract construction. Kupperman & Co., Inc. v. … Therefore, all risks are covered unless clearly and specifically excluded. At the trial, James H. Moore, a State Farm agent of twelve (12) years testified as an expert in the area of insurance on behalf of plaintiffs.

Gilbert v. BDOWS, INC.

764 So. 2d 313 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 2000

Lawson is listed as the insured on the declarations page and qualifies as an insured under the policy, as he is an individual and the sole owner of a business which may bear some liability in the accident at issue. … Based on the foregoing discussion, we find no error in the trial court's ruling that the requirements for establishing waiver were not met.

Doskey v. Hebert

645 So. 2d 674 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 29, 1994

Doskey during these inspections are therefore not hearsay, and the trial court was clearly wrong in excluding the testimony. … At trial, plaintiffs introduced the testimony of Joseph Virdagomo, who was qualified by the court in the field of general contracting. Mr.

Irene Manuel v. Republic Vanguard Insurance Company

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 2, 2008

The record establishes that, at the time of the incident, the facility was under construction and not open to the public. F.D. … The jury was manifestly erroneous, or clearly wrong when it found plaintiff free of fault; 2.

Luigi Malta, Individually and on Behalf of His Minor Child, Giovanni Malta v. Herbert S. Hiller Corporation, Hiller Offshore Services, Inc., the Hiller Companies, Inc., Helis Energy, L.L.C. and Helis Enterprises, Inc.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 25, 2020

Hebert’s own Clean Agent Cylinder Report establishes his failure to “properly diagnose and report the status of the Generator #1 cylinder.” … Further, there is no evidence to establish that the cylinder was damaged by ruin, vice or defect, or that Helis knew or should have known about it.

D'AMBROSIA v. Lang

985 So. 2d 800 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2008

In that case there was uncontroverted evidence establishing the loss of vocational opportunities. … that the fact finder is clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.

Hughes v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.

793 So. 2d 537 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 22, 2001

Nothing in evidence establishes negligence on the part of the plaintiff. Rather, the evidence establishes that Jurls bears the fault for the accident. … The record establishes that the plaintiff suffered a soft tissue injury caused by the accident. This is supported by medical testimony.

Michael E. Duronslet v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Marlin N. Gusman, Sheriff for Parish of Orleans

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 27, 2022

.;3 and deprived him of his rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed by the United States Constitution. … Thus, it qualifies as a final judgment subject to appeal under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(A)(1) even though the trial court did not designate it as such.

Corbello v. Iowa Production

806 So. 2d 32 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 26, 2001

Different methods are used to establish commercial rental rates and terms. … We must consider all of the factors identified in Williamson to establish an appropriate fee.

Carruth v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.

113 So. 2d 56 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 27, 1959

"The rule universally obtaining is clearly and succinctly stated in 45 C. … The fact that the company makes a specific inquiry of insured as to a particular matter establishes its materiality.

Miller v. Lambert

380 So. 2d 695 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 7, 1980

Fejta contemplated that the building, accepted by Lattie Development as an outer shell only, would be completed at a later date, by qualified and competent workers, into an office building. … That document clearly shows Miller had no special training and little work experience and none whatsoever in dealing with electricity.

Medical Review Panel for the Claim of Richard Bush, Pcf No. 2018-01209 .

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 2, 2021

Plaintiff established the application of contra non valentem to the survival action but not to the wrongful death action. … In this case, evidence was introduced at the hearing on the peremptory exception of prescription; thus, the manifest error-clearly wrong standard is applicable.

In re Houston

253 So. 3d 836 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 15, 2018

Although Louisiana statutory law does not directly establish a right of self-representation in civil cases, Louisiana jurisprudence firmly establishes this right. Dixon v. Shuford , 28,138 (La. … This assignment of error lacks merit. *849 Jury verdict clearly erroneous Ms. Williams argues the jury verdict was clearly erroneous based upon the evidence, particularly a finding of gross negligence.

State v. Dominick

2013 La.App. 4 Cir. 0270 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2014

The defendant’s asserted mitigating factors clearly address his guilt or innocence in the case sub judi-ce, and are not a basis for a sentencing downward departure. … Clearly, the defendant’s objection was based upon the trial court’s denial of his motion for downward departure in case # 505-411.

Williams v. NOTAMI HOSPITALS OF LOUISIANA

927 So. 2d 368 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 4, 2005

Williams was admitted as a patient to LRMC, to admit it was a qualified health care provider under the Medical Malpractice Act, La. R.S. 40:1299.41, et seq. … The issue to be determined by this court is whether LRMC has clearly shown that an administrative remedy remains available to the plaintiff with respect to the allegations raised by the plaintiffs in their first supplemental

Canty v. Terrebonne Parish Police Jury

397 So. 2d 1370 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 23, 1981

The trial judge was clearly wrong in finding a lack of causal connection between the depth of the bayou and the subsidence on Canty's property. Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978); Canter v. … NEGLIGENCE Conduct is negligent if it "falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm.

Exxon Corp. v. Thompson

564 So. 2d 387 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 27, 1990

And, even the `exclusive right to explore' is qualified by the imposition of duties with regard to others who have rights in the common reservoir. La.Rev. Stat.Ann. § 31:9 and 10. … Goldking Properties, Inc., 396 So.2d 528 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1981), writ denied, 400 So.2d 904 (La.1981) is clearly distinguishable from the instant case.